CRM-M-16143 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA 209 ISHWAR SINGH STATE OF CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Present: SURYA PARTAP SINGH, J. petitioner under Section 482 of ‘the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023’. It has been filed with regard to a case arising out of FIR No 21.04.2024 467, 468, 471 and 120 District Hansi. 2. ‘Rajesh Kumar’, hereinafter being referred to as ‘complainant’ only. It was stated by the above standard in Science stream and wanted to pursue a BAMS course. According to complai came in contact as a Lab Operator at ‘Sonakshi Hospital’. As per complainant, the petitioner 16143-2026 (O&M) 5 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA CHANDIGARH ISHWAR SINGH VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA P Mr. Sant Lal Barwala, Advocate for the petitioner. **** SURYA PARTAP SINGH, J. (Oral): This petition for pre-arrest bail is petitioner under Section 482 of ‘the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023’. It has been filed with regard to a case arising out of FIR No 21.04.2024, for the commission of offence punishable under Sections , 471 and 120-B of Indian Penal Code, Police Station Hansi City, District Hansi. The abovementioned FIR came into being at the instance of ‘Rajesh Kumar’, hereinafter being referred to as ‘complainant’ only. It was stated by the above-named complainan standard in Science stream and wanted to pursue a BAMS course. According to complainant, when he was looking for came in contact of ‘Ishwar Badala’ (the petitioner herein), who was working Lab Operator at ‘Sonakshi Hospital’. As per complainant, the petitioner IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-16143-2026 (O&M) DECIDED ON: 06.04.2026 .....PETITIONER VERSUS .....RESPONDENT SURYA PARTAP SINGH , Advocate for the petitioner. arrest bail is the first petition filed by the petitioner under Section 482 of ‘the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023’. It has been filed with regard to a case arising out of FIR No.234 dated , for the commission of offence punishable under Sections 420, B of Indian Penal Code, Police Station Hansi City, The abovementioned FIR came into being at the instance of ‘Rajesh Kumar’, hereinafter being referred to as ‘complainant’ only. It was named complainant that he had studied upto 12 standard in Science stream and wanted to pursue a BAMS course. According nant, when he was looking for admission in BAMS College, he petitioner herein), who was working Lab Operator at ‘Sonakshi Hospital’. As per complainant, the petitioner (O&M) .2026 petition filed by the petitioner under Section 482 of ‘the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, dated 420, B of Indian Penal Code, Police Station Hansi City, The abovementioned FIR came into being at the instance of ‘Rajesh Kumar’, hereinafter being referred to as ‘complainant’ only. It was t that he had studied upto 12th standard in Science stream and wanted to pursue a BAMS course. According admission in BAMS College, he petitioner herein), who was working Lab Operator at ‘Sonakshi Hospital’. As per complainant, the petitioner VINOD KUMAR ARYA 2026.04.07 10:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-16143 told him that his known, namely ‘Keshav Dhamija’ and ‘Usha Dhamija’, used to help the aspirants College. As per complainant, he was help him (the complainant) thereafter the petitioner facilitated his meeting with Damija couple, who assured him admission in BAMS course against the payment of Rs.10 lacs. The complain course in 3. abovementioned money, the detailed marksheet was supplied to him an his registration, as a medical practitioner, even a registration certificate was handed over to him. As per complainant, all the abovementioned documents were found to be forged and fabricated. 4. 5. 6. the petitioner is innocent who has been falsely implicated in the present case. According to learned counsel for the petitioner the only allegation against the petitioner is that ‘Keshav Dhamija’ and ‘Usha Dhamija’ of money learned counsel for the petitioner that into the account of prime accused was not with regard to the complainant and the prime accused. According to learned counsel for the petitioner the abovementioned money was towards 16143-2026 (O&M) 5 2 told him that his known, namely ‘Keshav Dhamija’ and ‘Usha Dhamija’, used to help the aspirants looking for . As per complainant, he was assured him (the complainant) in approaching them. According to complainant, thereafter the petitioner facilitated his meeting with Damija couple, who assured him admission in BAMS course against the payment of Rs.10 lacs. The complainant has further alleged that his admission was assured in course in ‘Chhatrapati Shahu Ji University, Kanpur’. It has been further alleged by the complainant that on receipt of abovementioned money, the detailed marksheet was supplied to him an his registration, as a medical practitioner, even a registration certificate was handed over to him. As per complainant, all the abovementioned documents were found to be forged and fabricated. Heard. The record has been perused carefully. It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is innocent who has been falsely implicated in the present case. According to learned counsel for the petitioner the only allegation against the petitioner is that, that he introduced the complainant with prime accused ‘Keshav Dhamija’ and ‘Usha Dhamija’. With , and payment of the same to co learned counsel for the petitioner that the the account of prime accused was not with regard to the complainant and the prime accused. According to learned counsel for the petitioner the abovementioned money was towards told him that his known, namely ‘Keshav Dhamija’ and ‘Usha Dhamija’, looking for admission to MBBS & BAMS assured that he (the petitioner) would in approaching them. According to complainant, thereafter the petitioner facilitated his meeting with Damija couple, who assured him admission in BAMS course against the payment of Rs.10 lacs. alleged that his admission was assured in online ‘Chhatrapati Shahu Ji University, Kanpur’. It has been further alleged by the complainant that on receipt of abovementioned money, the detailed marksheet was supplied to him and for his registration, as a medical practitioner, even a registration certificate was handed over to him. As per complainant, all the abovementioned documents The record has been perused carefully. It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is innocent who has been falsely implicated in the present case. According to learned counsel for the petitioner the only allegation against e introduced the complainant with prime accused . With regard to allegation of receipt , and payment of the same to co-accused, it has been contended by the money deposited by the petitioner the account of prime accused was not with regard to the deal between the complainant and the prime accused. According to learned counsel for the petitioner the abovementioned money was towards the commission which told him that his known, namely ‘Keshav Dhamija’ and ‘Usha Dhamija’, MBBS & BAMS would in approaching them. According to complainant, thereafter the petitioner facilitated his meeting with Damija couple, who assured him admission in BAMS course against the payment of Rs.10 lacs. online It has been further alleged by the complainant that on receipt of d for his registration, as a medical practitioner, even a registration certificate was handed over to him. As per complainant, all the abovementioned documents It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is innocent who has been falsely implicated in the present case. According to learned counsel for the petitioner the only allegation against e introduced the complainant with prime accused llegation of receipt t has been contended by by the petitioner between the complainant and the prime accused. According to learned counsel for the the commission which VINOD KUMAR ARYA 2026.04.07 10:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-16143 was supposed to be petitioner is running a laboratory. 7. abovementioned arguments. It has been contended by learned State Counsel that the petitioner actively participated in the same and and paid it to the main accused. It has also been contended by learned State Counsel that there are allegations against the peti that they had complainant. 8. verification report from the concerned per report of concerned University, the DMC supplied the complainant Counsel that on online examination were written on the learned State Counsel petitioner is 9. 10. settled pri power for grant of anticipatory bail and it should not be granted as a matter of rule. Rather as per law the abovesaid benefit should be granted only when the Court is convinced that except extraordinary remedy. 16143-2026 (O&M) 5 3 was supposed to be paid by the petitioner to the prime accused petitioner is running a laboratory. The learned State Counsel has controverted the abovementioned arguments. It has been contended by learned State Counsel that the petitioner had facilitated the abovementioned crime and that he had actively participated in the same and received money from the complainant and paid it to the main accused. It has also been contended by learned State Counsel that there are allegations against the peti that they had prepared and supplied fake complainant. It has further been contended by learned State Counsel that verification report from the concerned University report of concerned University, the DMC supplied the complainant is fake one. It has also been contended by learned State Counsel that online examination were written by the complainant and those online examination were written on the learned State Counsel for the recovery of laptop petitioner is necessary. The record has been perused carefully. As far as the benefit of anticipatory bail is con settled principle of law that the Court must be circumspect, while exercising power for grant of anticipatory bail and it should not be granted as a matter of rule. Rather as per law the abovesaid benefit should be granted only when the Court is convinced that exceptional circumstances exist for the extraordinary remedy. paid by the petitioner to the prime accused, as The learned State Counsel has controverted the abovementioned arguments. It has been contended by learned State Counsel facilitated the abovementioned crime and that he had received money from the complainant and paid it to the main accused. It has also been contended by learned State Counsel that there are allegations against the petitioner and his co-accused and supplied fake ‘Detailed Marksheets’ to the been contended by learned State Counsel that University has been received and as report of concerned University, the DMC supplied by the petitioner to . It has also been contended by learned State examination were written by the complainant and those online examination were written on the laptop of the petitioner. As per for the recovery of laptop custodial interrogation of The record has been perused carefully. As far as the benefit of anticipatory bail is concerned, it is of law that the Court must be circumspect, while exercising power for grant of anticipatory bail and it should not be granted as a matter of rule. Rather as per law the abovesaid benefit should be granted only when ional circumstances exist for the as the The learned State Counsel has controverted the abovementioned arguments. It has been contended by learned State Counsel facilitated the abovementioned crime and that he had received money from the complainant and paid it to the main accused. It has also been contended by learned State accused ‘Detailed Marksheets’ to the been contended by learned State Counsel that the has been received and as the petitioner to . It has also been contended by learned State examination were written by the complainant and those laptop of the petitioner. As per custodial interrogation of cerned, it is of law that the Court must be circumspect, while exercising power for grant of anticipatory bail and it should not be granted as a matter of rule. Rather as per law the abovesaid benefit should be granted only when ional circumstances exist for the VINOD KUMAR ARYA 2026.04.07 10:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-16143 11. India in the case of Srikant Upadhyay v. State of Bihar 2024 SCC OnLine SC 282, has observed that power to grant anticipatory bail is power, and that irrespective of the fact that in a number of cases, it has been held that bail is a rule, it cannot; by any stretch of imagination, be said that anticipatory bail is a rule. 12. case has further observed that rule of anticipatory bail is a question of judicial discretion depending upon the facts and circumstances of each case. According to Hon'ble Apex Court, when called upon to exercise the abovesaid power the Court con interim protection to the accused in serious cases may lead to miscarriage of justice and may hamper the investigation. 13. Vishwajeet Jadhav v. Petition (Criminal) No. 10255 of 2024, decided on 21.07.2024), the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India has held that anticipatory bail is an exceptional remedy and it ought not be granted in a routine manner. Supreme Court, there must exist strong reasons for extending indulgence of this extraordinary remedy to a person accused of grave offence. 14. 1980 SCC (2) 565, the Hon'ble S 16143-2026 (O&M) 5 4 With regard to such situation, the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Srikant Upadhyay v. State of Bihar 2024 SCC OnLine SC 282, has observed that power to grant anticipatory bail is power, and that irrespective of the fact that in a number of cases, it has been held that bail is a rule, it cannot; by any stretch of imagination, be said that anticipatory bail is a rule. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the above case has further observed that rule of anticipatory bail is a question of judicial discretion depending upon the facts and circumstances of each case. According to Hon'ble Apex Court, when called upon to exercise the abovesaid power the Court concerned has to be very cautious, as the grant of interim protection to the accused in serious cases may lead to miscarriage of justice and may hamper the investigation. Similarly, in the case of Nikita Jagganath Shetty alias Nikita Vishwajeet Jadhav v. The State of Maharashtra and Another (Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 10255 of 2024, decided on 21.07.2024), the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India has held that anticipatory bail is an exceptional remedy and it ought not be granted in a routine manner. Supreme Court, there must exist strong reasons for extending indulgence of this extraordinary remedy to a person accused of grave offence. In the case of Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia etc. v. State of Punjab 1980 SCC (2) 565, the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India held that: With regard to such situation, the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Srikant Upadhyay v. State of Bihar 2024 SCC OnLine SC 282, has observed that power to grant anticipatory bail is extraordinary power, and that irrespective of the fact that in a number of cases, it has been held that bail is a rule, it cannot; by any stretch of imagination, be said that The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the abovementioned case has further observed that rule of anticipatory bail is a question of judicial discretion depending upon the facts and circumstances of each case. According to Hon'ble Apex Court, when called upon to exercise the cerned has to be very cautious, as the grant of interim protection to the accused in serious cases may lead to miscarriage of justice and may hamper the investigation. Similarly, in the case of Nikita Jagganath Shetty alias Nikita The State of Maharashtra and Another (Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 10255 of 2024, decided on 21.07.2024), the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India has held that anticipatory bail is an exceptional remedy and it ought not be granted in a routine manner. As per the Hon'ble Supreme Court, there must exist strong reasons for extending indulgence of this extraordinary remedy to a person accused of grave offence. In the case of Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia etc. v. State of Punjab upreme Court of India held that:- With regard to such situation, the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Srikant Upadhyay v. State of Bihar 2024 SCC OnLine extraordinary power, and that irrespective of the fact that in a number of cases, it has been held that bail is a rule, it cannot; by any stretch of imagination, be said that mentioned case has further observed that rule of anticipatory bail is a question of judicial discretion depending upon the facts and circumstances of each case. According to Hon'ble Apex Court, when called upon to exercise the cerned has to be very cautious, as the grant of interim protection to the accused in serious cases may lead to miscarriage of Similarly, in the case of Nikita Jagganath Shetty alias Nikita The State of Maharashtra and Another (Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 10255 of 2024, decided on 21.07.2024), the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India has held that anticipatory bail is an exceptional As per the Hon'ble Supreme Court, there must exist strong reasons for extending indulgence of In the case of Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia etc. v. State of Punjab VINOD KUMAR ARYA 2026.04.07 10:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-16143 15. that there are very specific and regard to supported In addition to above, which was used for writing the online examination from the possession of petitioner. 16. custodial interrogation of the Investigating Agency is a valuable right, and in the present case, if such right is denied to the Investigating Agency likely to result into miscarriage of justice, as the investigation may not take a proper headway and the In requisite evidence. 16143-2026 (O&M) 5 5 (i) The power under Section 438, Criminal Procedure Code, is of an extraordinary character and must be exercised sparingly in exceptional cases only. (ii) In addition to the limitations mentioned in Section 437, the petitioner must make out a special case for the exercise of the power to grant anticipatory bail. (iii) Where a legitimate case for the remand of the offender to the police custody under Section 167(2) can be made out by the investigating agency or a incriminating material from information likely to be received from the offender under Section 27 of the Evidence Act can be made out, the power under Section 438 should not be exercised. In the present case a bare perusal o that there are very specific and direct allegation regard to payment of money and the abovementioned allegations supported by the transaction between the p In addition to above, as contended by learned State Counsel which was used for writing the online examination from the possession of petitioner. It shall not be out of place to mention here l interrogation of the Investigating Agency is a valuable right, and in the present case, if such right is denied to the Investigating Agency likely to result into miscarriage of justice, as the investigation may not take a proper headway and the Investigating Agency may not be able to collect the requisite evidence. The power under Section 438, Criminal Procedure Code, is of an extraordinary character and must be exercised sparingly in In addition to the limitations mentioned in Section 437, the petitioner must make out a special case for the exercise of the power to grant anticipatory bail. Where a legitimate case for the remand of the offender to the police custody under Section 167(2) can be made out by the investigating agency or a reasonable claim to secure incriminating material from information likely to be received from the offender under Section 27 of the Evidence Act can be made out, the power under Section 438 should not be In the present case a bare perusal of the contents of FIR shows direct allegations against the petitioner with and the abovementioned allegations are further transaction between the petitioner and the prime accused. as contended by learned State Counsel, the laptop which was used for writing the online examination, is also to be recovered It shall not be out of place to mention here that right of l interrogation of the Investigating Agency is a valuable right, and in the present case, if such right is denied to the Investigating Agency, it is likely to result into miscarriage of justice, as the investigation may not take a vestigating Agency may not be able to collect the The power under Section 438, Criminal Procedure Code, is of an extraordinary character and must be exercised sparingly in In addition to the limitations mentioned in Section 437, the petitioner must make out a special case for the exercise of the Where a legitimate case for the remand of the offender to the police custody under Section 167(2) can be made out by the reasonable claim to secure incriminating material from information likely to be received from the offender under Section 27 of the Evidence Act can be made out, the power under Section 438 should not be shows against the petitioner with further etitioner and the prime accused. the laptop is also to be recovered that right of l interrogation of the Investigating Agency is a valuable right, and in it is likely to result into miscarriage of justice, as the investigation may not take a vestigating Agency may not be able to collect the VINOD KUMAR ARYA 2026.04.07 10:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-16143 17. above-discussed principles of law, it transpires that no such exceptional circumstances exist in this case, which m jurisdiction, vested in this Court for grant of anticipatory bail. Thus, it is hereby held that the present petition is devoid of merits deserves dismissal. Accordingly, the same is hereby 18. shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. 19. applications, if any, are rendered infructuous. 16143-2026 (O&M) 5 6 If the fact-situation of instant case is analyzed in the light of discussed principles of law, it transpires that no such exceptional circumstances exist in this case, which m jurisdiction, vested in this Court for grant of anticipatory bail. Thus, it is hereby held that the present petition is devoid of merits deserves dismissal. Accordingly, the same is hereby dismissed It is, however, clarified that the observations made hereinabove shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. Since the main petition has been dismissed, pending applications, if any, are rendered infructuous. Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No situation of instant case is analyzed in the light of discussed principles of law, it transpires that no such exceptional circumstances exist in this case, which may call for the exercise of the jurisdiction, vested in this Court for grant of anticipatory bail. Thus, it is hereby held that the present petition is devoid of merits deserves dismissal. dismissed. clarified that the observations made hereinabove shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. Since the main petition has been dismissed, pending applications, if any, are rendered infructuous. Yes/No Yes/No situation of instant case is analyzed in the light of discussed principles of law, it transpires that no such exceptional ay call for the exercise of the jurisdiction, vested in this Court for grant of anticipatory bail. Thus, it is hereby held that the present petition is devoid of merits deserves dismissal. clarified that the observations made hereinabove shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. Since the main petition has been dismissed, pending VINOD KUMAR ARYA 2026.04.07 10:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document