CRM-M- IN T 230 Deepak Bh v. State of Ha CORAM: Present: AARADHN 1. 14.05.2022 Sections 40 Station Sec 483 of BNS 2. by way of Police, Pan -47566-2025 -1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJ CHANDIGA ak Bhola of Haryana AM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE AA Mr. Harsh Sharma, Advocate f Mr. Vikram Singh, AAG, Hary Mr. Sanjot Singh Thind, Advo **** ADHNA SAWHNEY, J. (Oral) Petitioner, who is an accuse 2022, registered against him for 406, 420, 467, 468, 471, 102-B Sector-20, Panchkula, has filed th f BNSS for grant of bail. Facts of the case as taken from ay of affidavit of Rakesh Kumar, H e, Panchkula, are reproduced as below “3. That the brief facts o 14.05.2020, a complaint be 29.11.2021, from Mr. Ajane V 1- PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT DIGARH CRM-M-47566-2025 Date of Decision: 09.02.2026 …Petitioner. …Respondent. CE AARADHNA SAWHNEY. ocate for the petitioner. , Haryana. , Advocate for the complainant. accused in case FIR No. 102 date for commission of offences und B of Indian Penal Code, at Polic iled the present petition under Sectio n from para 3 of the status report file mar, HPS, Assistant Commissioner o below:- ts of the instant case are that o t bearing number 1532-PW, date ne Vijay Sinha, Chief Manager, Ban .2026 dated s under t Police Section rt filed ioner of at on dated , Bank GURBACHAN SINGH 2026.02.16 14:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- -47566-2025 -2 of India, Secto-20, Panchku Station Sector-20, Panchkula complaint was directed agains Dhir, R/o # 336, Sector-2, Pa and Deepak Bhola, Proprie Jewellers, Shop number 34, 9855226749 for the offence criminal breach of trust, cri Gold Loan Account No. 67 against Gold Loan Account N OF INDIA is a body corpora Companies Acquisition and T having its head office in Band 6, Mumbai, Maharashtra and India. One such branch is i Panchkula. In the year 2020, had approached the said Bank loan. The bank accepted th sanctioned a gold loan amoun Lakh Ninety Nine Thousand o the said accused vide a sancti sanctioning the said gold loa valuation done of the said empanelled gold valuer name M/s Shree Guru Nanak Jewe 2- chkula was received at the Polic kula through registered post. Th ainst one Leena Dhir w/o Bal Kisha , Panchkula, mobile no. 781411668 prietor of M/s Shree Guru Nana 34, Sector 9, Panchkula, mobile n fences of cheating, fraud, forger , criminal conspiracy regarding on . 67152110000086 and FTTL Loa nt No. 671565810000004 with BAN porate constituted under The Bankin nd Transfer of Undertaking Act 197 andra Kurla, Plot number C-5, Blo and it has its branches througho is in SCO Number 290, Sector- 020, one accused namely Leena Dh Bank and applied for obtaining a go d the said request and according ounting to Rs.1,99,000/- (Rupees On d only) against the gold pledged b nction letter dated 29.2.2020. Befo loan, the complainant bank got th aid pledged gold through their on namely Deepak Bhola, Proprietor ewellers, Shop number 34, Sector Police The ishan 16688 Nanak ile no. rgery, g one Loan BANK nking t 1971 , Bloc- ghout -20, Dhir a gold dingly s One ed by Before ot the ir one tor of tor 9, GURBACHAN SINGH 2026.02.16 14:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- -47566-2025 -3 Panchkula. The said accused documents in favour of the co loan amount was then disbu number 671565810000004 ag the tune of Rs.10372/- (Rupee Seventy Two only) vide a sanc after obtaining the said loans maintain financial discipline and consequently the said loan 31.3.2021 pursuant to the complainant bank got served upon the accused Leena Dh loan amount along with intere Dhir failed to settle the said complainant bank started the to the pledged gold in order Before initiating the said pro bank got carried out anoth empanelled gold valuer Mr. mentioning here that the entir Mr. Gurcharan Singh was vid declared it to be fake. T connivance with each other cheating, fraud, criminal conspiracy against the comp 3- sed Leena Dhir executed several loa e complainant bank. The sanctione disbursed in one gold loan accou 4 against the aforesaid gold loan upees Ten Thousand Three Hundre sanction letter dated 26.8.2020. Th oans, the accused Leena Dhir did n line as regards the said loan accou loan account was declared a NPA o the RBI guidelines. Thereafter, th rved a legal notice dated 22.7.202 Dhir to settle the entire outstandin nterest. However, the accused Leen said liabilities. That thereafter, th the process of auction with referenc rder to recover the outstanding due process of auction, the complaina nother valuation from one of the Mr. Gurcharan Singh. It is wor entire exercise performed by the sa s videographed who after examining . That above accused persons ther have committed the offences al breach of trust and crimin omplainant bank. The complaina l loan tioned ccount oan to ndred . That id not ccount PA on r, the .2021 nding Leena r, the erence dues. ainant their worth e said ning it ns in ces of iminal ainant GURBACHAN SINGH 2026.02.16 14:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- undertaken recorded, d the Bank w pledged wi copy of th Evidence A during inte running a je Jewellers’ Petitioner a but would condition th execution o the Bank ce She paid on adequate in Indian Pena the efforts nature are -47566-2025 -4 bank had approached the a requesting them to repay th complainant sought lodging persons.” After the registration of rtaken, during the course of which sta ded, documents tendered by the accus ank were also collected. Video reco ed with the Bank and valuation of G of the valuation certificate as also ence Act were also taken into posse interrogation, stated that she had a a jewellery shop under the name an ’, for seeking financial assistanc ioner assured her that he could help he ould instead deposit bogus jewellery ition that the loan amount would be ution of this plan, petitioner provided ank certifying that the jewellery mort paid only two installments and default uate incriminating evidence, offences n Penal Code were also added. Petitioner, who had fled abroa fforts made by the Government of Ind are registered against petitioner. 4- he accused persons numerous tim y the loan but to no avail. Th ging of FIR against said accuse of the case, investigations we ich statement of relevant witnesses wa accused while taking ‘Gold loan’ fro o recording of the auction of the Go n of Gold by the valuer along with also a certificate u/s 65-B of India possession. Co-accused Leena Dh had approached the petitioner, who ame and style of ‘M/s Shri Guru Nana sistance by mortgaging the jeweller elp her attain Gold loan from the Ban ellery and security. Though, he put d be equally divided between them. vided a bogus verification certificate y mortgaged by Leena Dhar is genuin defaulted thereafter. Upon gathering o fences under Sections 467, 468, 471 o abroad was arrested on 21.3.2025 wi of India. Admittedly, 31 cases of lik It is not disputed that co-accuse times The cused s were ses was from he Gold with a f Indian na Dhar , who is u Nanak wellery. he Bank he put a em. In ficate to genuine. ering of , 471 of 25 with s of like accused GURBACHAN SINGH 2026.02.16 14:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- Leena Dha already dep petition for pending ad Sessions Ju the said app for grant of 3. aforesaid f accused, h strength of deserves to 21.3.2025, purpose as 21 of the be against exception” 4. submits tha fake jewell case for gr there is eve not appeari -47566-2025 -5 a Dhar (who was granted the conc dy deposited a sum of Rs.2,51,000/- ion for quashing of the present FIR ng adjudication before this Court. Petitioner moved an applicatio ions Judge, Panchkula, who in terms o aid application. Aggrieved of the sam rant of bail. Learned counsel for the petiti said facts, particularly that co-accuse sed, had already deposited the amou gth of which a petition for quashin rves to be taken in his (P) favour, 2025, as his (P) further incarcerati ose as the same would not only be vio Constitution of India, including ainst the principle of “Bail is a gen ion”. Prayer for allowing the petition Per contra, learned State cou that in view of the role played by jewellery as real and did not mention grant of bail is made out, for if every likelihood of petitioner fleei ppearing in the Court. That apart, his 5- concession of bail on 2.7.2022) - with the complainant-Bank and t FIR has already been filed which lication for grant of bail before learne erms of order dated 8.8.2025, dismisse he same, present petition has been file petitioner contends that in light of th accused Leena Dhar, who is the ma amount of Rs.2,51,000/-, and on th uashing has been filed, lenient vie vour, who has been in custody sinc rceration would not serve any usef violative of his rights under Artic right to speedy trial but would als general rule and incarceration is etition has been made. counsel while opposing the reques by the petitioner, who identified ntion the correct weight of the Gold, if extended the concession of bai fleeing from the process of justice his past antecedents are also far fro 22) has k and a hich is learned smissed en filed t of the he main on the nt view y since useful Article also an request, the old, no bail, stice by from GURBACHAN SINGH 2026.02.16 14:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- satisfactory petition is 5. documents 6. Singh Alia held that a nonetheless concession -47566-2025 -6 factory, he being involved in several is prayed for. Heard learned counsel for ments on record. Recently, a Co-ordinate Ben Alias Billa Vs. State of Punjab pa that although an accused may hav theless if the incarceration period ession of bail. “Therefore, to elucidate furth basic and fundamental princip is a part of reasonable, fair an Article 21 of the Constitution cannot be denied to the accus court in “Hussainara Kha Secretary, State of Bihar, Pa this, reference can be drawn u the under-trials should be as the nature of accusation and t of conviction and the nature o apprehension of tampering wi threat to the complainant. As f and involvement of the petitio reliance can be placed upon th CRM-M-25914-2022 titled as 6- veral cases of like nature. Dismissal for the parties and perused e Bench of this Court in Neelkam passed in CRM-M-39765-2024 ha y have past criminal antecedents b eriod is long, he is entitled for th further, this Court is conscious of th inciple of law that right to speedy tri ir and just procedure enshrined und tion of India. This constitutional rig ccused as is the mandate of the Ape Khatoon and ors (IV) v. Hom r, Patna”, (1980) 1 SCC 98. Besid wn upon that pre-conviction period as short as possible keeping in vie nd the severity of punishment in ca re of supporting evidence, reasonab g with the witness or apprehension . As far as the pendency of other cas etitioner in other cases is concerne on the order of this Court rendered d as “Baljinder Singh alias Rock v issal of the kamal 024 has nts but for the of the y trial under l right Apex Home esides iod of n view n case nable ion of cases erned, red in ck vs. GURBACHAN SINGH 2026.02.16 14:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- 7. have alread concerned, amount of petition for thereof, bu that petition his favour that his (P) under Artic but would incarcerati by Hon’ble another, 2 -47566-2025 -7 State of Punjab” decided referring Article 21 of the Co held that no doubt, at the tim antecedents of the petitioner same time it is equally true t during the course of trial has t the evidence in that case alo evidence in the other pending adherence to the rule of denia of other cases/convictions in petitioner in a situation of den Factual aspects of the case lea already been noticed in para 2 of the erned, admittedly the main borrower, of Rs.2,51,000/- to the Bank and for quashing of FIR is pending ad but without commenting further petitioner has been in custody since avour by extending him concession of his (P) further incarceration would no r Article 21 of the Constitution of Ind would also be against the principle eration is an exception” as held by H on’ble Supreme Court in Dataram 2018(2) R.C.R. (Criminal) 131. 7- ed on 02.03.2023, wherein, whi Constitution of India, this Court ha e time of granting bail, the crimin ner are to be looked into but at th rue that the appreciation of evidenc has to be looked into with reference e alone and not with respect to th ding cases. In such eventuality, stri denial of bail on account of pendenc s in all probability would land th f denial of concession of bail.” leading to the registration of the FI the order. So far as present FIR ower, i.e. Leena Dhar, had returned and based on the said compromise, adjudication in this Court. In vie on the merits of the case, the fa 21.3.2025, lenient view is taken ion of bail, this Court is of the opinio uld not only be violative of his righ of India, including right to speedy tri ciple of “Bail is a general rule an d by Hon’ble Supreme Court in as he ram vs. State of Uttar Pradesh an while rt has iminal at the idence nce to to the , strict dency d the FIR FIR is rned an mise, a view fact taken in opinion is rights edy trial e and held and GURBACHAN SINGH 2026.02.16 14:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- 8. to his furni of learned the territori Court. The -47566-2025 -8 Resultantly, petitioner is grant s furnishing bail bonds along with two arned trial Court/Duty Magistrate con erritorial jurisdiction without seeking p . The petitioner shall abide by the foll (i) The petitioner will not the trial. (ii) The petitioner will prosecution witnesses. (iii) The petitioner shall no permission of the trial Court. (iv) The petitioner shall not offence of which, he is an acc he is suspected of. (v) The petitioner shall n induce, threaten or promise to facts of the case so as to dissu facts to the Court or to any evidence in any manner. (vi) The petitioner shall not (vii) The petitioner shall f number to the Trial Court fo same till the conclusion of the the petitioner seeks to chang shall be done only with prio Court, stating the reason for th (viii) The petitioner will appe and every date fixed, unless i Court. (ix) The trial Court/Duty M condition, as deemed app petitioner. 8- s granted the concession of bail subje ith two local sureties to the satisfactio te concerned and that he will not leav eking prior permission of the concerne he following conditions:- not tamper with the evidence durin ill not pressurize/ intimidate th l not leave the country without prio urt. l not commit an offence similar to th accused, or for commission of whic ll not directly or indirectly coerc ise to any person acquainted with th dissuade him/her from disclosing suc any police officer or tamper with th not in any manner misuse his liberty ll furnish his address and mobi rt forthwith and shall not change th f the trial and in case for any reaso ange any of the aforesaid, the sam prior intimation to the learned Tri for the same. appear before the trial Court on eac ess is exempted by a specific order ty Magistrate may impose any oth appropriate while releasing th subject sfaction ot leave ncerned during e the prior to the which oerce, ith the g such ith the berty. obile ge the eason, same Trial each der of other g the GURBACHAN SINGH 2026.02.16 14:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- 9. that in case at liberty t order. 10. herein are l construed a independen 09.02.2026 gbs -47566-2025 -9 Accordingly, the present petiti in case there is any breach of the afore erty to seek cancellation of bail as In view of the above, it is cla are limited for the purpose of prese trued as an opinion on the merits of the endently of the aforesaid observations .2026 Whether Speaking/reasoned Whether Reportable 9- t petition is allowed and it is made cle e aforesaid conditions, the State shall b ail as granted to the petitioner by th t is clarified that the observations mad f present proceedings and would not b s of the case and the trial would procee ations. (AARADHNA SAWHNEY) JUDGE : Yes/No : Yes/No de clear shall be by this ns made d not be proceed NEY) GURBACHAN SINGH 2026.02.16 14:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document