CRM-M- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT 104 Samar Mohan Ranga State of Haryana Date of decision: Date of Uploading : 1 CORAM: Present: SUMEET GOEL 1. seeking grant of anticipatory/pre 2023 in FIR No.05 dated 24.03.2026 registered for offences punishable under Sections 13(1)(a) read with Section 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and Sections 316 BNS, 2023 at Police Station State Vigilance and Anti Corruption Bureau, Panchkula. 2. of a reference received from the Government of Haryana financial irregularities in Fixed Deposit Receipts (FDRs) and bank accounts of Municipal Corporation, Panchkula maintained with Kotak Mahindra Bank, Sector Corporation Panchkula had rec -31372-2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Samar Mohan Ranga V/s State of Haryana Date of decision: 17.07.2026 Date of Uploading : 18.07.2026 CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Mr. Vinod Ghai, Senior Advocate with Mr. Ritesh Aggarwal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Gurmeet Singh, AAG Haryana. ***** SUMEET GOEL, J. (Oral) Present petition has been filed on behalf of the seeking grant of anticipatory/pre-arrest bail under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023 in FIR No.05 dated 24.03.2026 registered for offences punishable under Sections 13(1)(a) read with Section 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and Sections 316(5), 318(4), 336(3), 338, 340(2) and 61(2) BNS, 2023 at Police Station State Vigilance and Anti Corruption Bureau, Panchkula. As per the prosecution version, t of a reference received from the Government of Haryana financial irregularities in Fixed Deposit Receipts (FDRs) and bank accounts of Municipal Corporation, Panchkula maintained with Kotak Mahindra Bank, Sector-11, Panchkula. As per the allegations, Corporation Panchkula had recorded sixteen FDRs amounting to more than 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-31372-2026 ....Petitioner ....Respondent HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Mr. Vinod Ghai, Senior Advocate with Mr. Ritesh Aggarwal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Gurmeet Singh, AAG Haryana. Present petition has been filed on behalf of the petitioner arrest bail under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023 in FIR No.05 dated 24.03.2026 registered for offences punishable under Sections 13(1)(a) read with Section 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption (5), 318(4), 336(3), 338, 340(2) and 61(2) BNS, 2023 at Police Station State Vigilance and Anti Corruption Bureau, prosecution version, the FIR was lodged on the basis of a reference received from the Government of Haryana regarding serious financial irregularities in Fixed Deposit Receipts (FDRs) and bank accounts of Municipal Corporation, Panchkula maintained with Kotak Mahindra As per the allegations, the Municipal orded sixteen FDRs amounting to more than petitioner arrest bail under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023 in FIR No.05 dated 24.03.2026 registered for offences punishable under Sections 13(1)(a) read with Section 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption of BNS, 2023 at Police Station State Vigilance and Anti Corruption Bureau, he FIR was lodged on the basis regarding serious financial irregularities in Fixed Deposit Receipts (FDRs) and bank accounts of Municipal Corporation, Panchkula maintained with Kotak Mahindra Municipal orded sixteen FDRs amounting to more than AJAY KUMAR 2026.07.18 12:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- Rs.145 crores with a maturity value exceeding reconciliation of records, substantial discrepancies were noticed between the records maintained by the Municipal Corporation and those supplied b bank. It balance reflected in the bank statements did not maturity value. Further were not reflected in the official r per the allegations, t involving public funds registered against unknown bank officials and other unknown persons whose involvement was to be ascertained during amounts Corporation Panchkula subsequently utilized for acquisition of immovable properties. The name of the present petitioner basis of material collected by the investigating agency transactions and property dealings connected with the persons. 3. petitioner has been falsely implicated in named in the FIR. petitioner is neither an employee of Kotak Mahindra Bank nor an employee learned senior counsel, -31372-2026 145 crores with a maturity value exceeding reconciliation of records, substantial discrepancies were noticed between the records maintained by the Municipal Corporation and those supplied b bank. It has been alleged that eleven FDRs had matured, however the balance reflected in the bank statements did not maturity value. Furthermore, certain bank accounts were discovered which were not reflected in the official records of the Municipal Corporation. per the allegations, the discrepancies revealed a large involving public funds and accordingly, the FIR registered against unknown bank officials and other unknown persons whose involvement was to be ascertained during During the course of investigation, it were allegedly siphoned from the accounts of Municipal Corporation Panchkula via routing them through vario subsequently utilized for acquisition of immovable properties. The name of the present petitioner has surfaced during basis of material collected by the investigating agency actions and property dealings connected with the Learned senior counsel for the petitioner petitioner has been falsely implicated into the FIR in question named in the FIR. Learned senior counsel has further iterated that the petitioner is neither an employee of Kotak Mahindra Bank nor an employee/official of the Municipal Corporation Panchkula. According to learned senior counsel, the petitioner is merely a property 2 145 crores with a maturity value exceeding Rs.158 crores. During reconciliation of records, substantial discrepancies were noticed between the records maintained by the Municipal Corporation and those supplied by the that eleven FDRs had matured, however the balance reflected in the bank statements did not match with the expected , certain bank accounts were discovered which ecords of the Municipal Corporation. he discrepancies revealed a large-scale financial fraud , the FIR in question came to be registered against unknown bank officials and other unknown persons whose involvement was to be ascertained during the course of investigation. investigation, it has surfaced that huge allegedly siphoned from the accounts of Municipal through various bank accounts and subsequently utilized for acquisition of immovable properties. The name of surfaced during the course of investigation on the basis of material collected by the investigating agency, including financial actions and property dealings connected with the main accused counsel for the petitioner has iterated that the to the FIR in question as he is not Learned senior counsel has further iterated that the petitioner is neither an employee of Kotak Mahindra Bank nor an Municipal Corporation Panchkula. According to the petitioner is merely a property 158 crores. During reconciliation of records, substantial discrepancies were noticed between the y the that eleven FDRs had matured, however the with the expected , certain bank accounts were discovered which ecords of the Municipal Corporation. As scale financial fraud in question came to be registered against unknown bank officials and other unknown persons investigation. surfaced that huge allegedly siphoned from the accounts of Municipal us bank accounts and subsequently utilized for acquisition of immovable properties. The name of investigation on the including financial accused has iterated that the is not Learned senior counsel has further iterated that the petitioner is neither an employee of Kotak Mahindra Bank nor an Municipal Corporation Panchkula. According to the petitioner is merely a property AJAY KUMAR 2026.07.18 12:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- dealer/commission agent who facilitated certain property transactions on the instructions of co has been of the petitioner have been in the names of relative did not derive any wrongful gain from the transaction rightful commission. proceeding on assumptions and conjectures rather than on any tangible material which connects the petitioner with the alleged offence. senior counsel evidences possession of the investigating agency and, therefore, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not has been further contended on the basis of disclosure statement direct evidence embezzlement. petitioner has dee no criminal antecedents and, therefore, there is no need for the custodial interrogation of the petitioner. Learned petitioner is willing to join the tamper with evidence or influence any witness and shall abide by all the conditions imposed in case he is enlarged on pre of these submissions, the grant of concession of anticipat entreated for. -31372-2026 ommission agent who facilitated certain property transactions on the instructions of co-accused Pushpinder Singh @ Pushpinder Chaudhary. has been further contended that the amount of the petitioner have been utilized for the purpose of in the names of relative(s) of the said co- did not derive any wrongful gain from the transaction commission. It has been further contended that the investig proceeding on assumptions and conjectures rather than on any tangible material which connects the petitioner with the alleged offence. counsel has emphasized that the entire case is based s, bank records and financial transactions which are already in possession of the investigating agency and, therefore, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not warranted in the factual has been further contended that the name on the basis of disclosure statement(s) of co direct evidence which would connect the petitioner embezzlement. Learned senior counsel has further submitted that the petitioner has deep roots in society; is a permanent resident of the State; has no criminal antecedents and, therefore, there is no need for the custodial interrogation of the petitioner. Learned senior petitioner is willing to join the investigation as and when required, shall not tamper with evidence or influence any witness and shall abide by all the conditions imposed in case he is enlarged on pre of these submissions, the grant of concession of anticipat entreated for. 3 ommission agent who facilitated certain property transactions on the accused Pushpinder Singh @ Pushpinder Chaudhary. that the amount(s) received in the bank account the purpose of purchase of properties -accused and the petitioner himself did not derive any wrongful gain from the transaction(s) except for It has been further contended that the investigation is proceeding on assumptions and conjectures rather than on any tangible material which connects the petitioner with the alleged offence. Learned that the entire case is based on documentary inancial transactions which are already in possession of the investigating agency and, therefore, custodial interrogation warranted in the factual milieu of the case in hand that the name of the petitioner has surfaced only of co-accused persons and there is no which would connect the petitioner with the alleged Learned senior counsel has further submitted that the ociety; is a permanent resident of the State; has no criminal antecedents and, therefore, there is no need for the custodial senior counsel has asserted that the investigation as and when required, shall not tamper with evidence or influence any witness and shall abide by all the conditions imposed in case he is enlarged on pre-arrest bail. On the strength of these submissions, the grant of concession of anticipatory bail is ommission agent who facilitated certain property transactions on the accused Pushpinder Singh @ Pushpinder Chaudhary. It received in the bank account purchase of properties accused and the petitioner himself his ation is proceeding on assumptions and conjectures rather than on any tangible Learned documentary inancial transactions which are already in possession of the investigating agency and, therefore, custodial interrogation of the case in hand. It has surfaced only accused persons and there is no with the alleged Learned senior counsel has further submitted that the ociety; is a permanent resident of the State; has no criminal antecedents and, therefore, there is no need for the custodial counsel has asserted that the investigation as and when required, shall not tamper with evidence or influence any witness and shall abide by all the arrest bail. On the strength ory bail is AJAY KUMAR 2026.07.18 12:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- 4. anticipatory bail to the petitioner by arguing that the allegations against the petitioner are serious involving large well-planned running into several crores of rupees. the investigation has revealed that diverted from the accounts of Municipal Corpo through the for the purchase of various immovable properties. 08.07.2026, by way of affidavit of Bhartendra Kumar, Deputy Superintendent Panchkula, learned State counsel has submitted that the active participant in layering and diversion of the proceeds of The relevant part of the said reply reads thus: -31372-2026 Per contra, learned State counsel anticipatory bail to the petitioner by arguing that the allegations against the petitioner are serious involving large-scale embezzlement and planned economic offence involving misappropriation of public funds running into several crores of rupees. Learned State counsel has iterated that investigation has revealed that the diverted from the accounts of Municipal Corpo the account(s) connected with the petitioner and thereafter utilized purchase of various immovable properties. 08.07.2026, by way of affidavit of Bhartendra Kumar, Deputy Superintendent of Police, State Vigilance and Anti Corruption Bureau, Panchkula, learned State counsel has submitted that the active participant in layering and diversion of the proceeds of The relevant part of the said reply reads thus: “8 That the embezzled money accounts of Rajat Dahra Swati Sonia, Vinod, Kapil some main beneficiaries into the accounts of Sanat Enterprises (Directors – Sunny Garg and Priyanka Garg), Swati Tomar and other co-accused including Samar Mohan Ranga (Petitioner) in Layer 2 as follows:- Sr. No. Funds diverted to Debit Amount (Rs.) 1. Sanat Enterprises & Allied entities 6974,700,230.10 2. Swati Tomar 132,196,639.70 3. Pushpinder 294.619.507.24 4. Samar Mohan Ranga (Petitioner) 5,19,00,000 (Five crores and nineteen lacs) 5. Aryan Singh 35,00,000 Total(Rs.) 1,211,416,377.04 4 , learned State counsel has opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner by arguing that the allegations against the scale embezzlement and disclose a economic offence involving misappropriation of public funds Learned State counsel has iterated that the substantial amount(s) have been diverted from the accounts of Municipal Corporation, Panchkula and routed connected with the petitioner and thereafter utilized purchase of various immovable properties. Referring to reply dated 08.07.2026, by way of affidavit of Bhartendra Kumar, Deputy of Police, State Vigilance and Anti Corruption Bureau, Panchkula, learned State counsel has submitted that the petitioner is active participant in layering and diversion of the proceeds of the crime. The relevant part of the said reply reads thus: was further diverted illegally from Tomar SK Agro Tech SK Agro Farm beneficiaries into the accounts of Sanat Sunny Garg and Priyanka Garg), Swati Tomar accused including Samar Mohan Ranga (Petitioner) in Debit Amount Credit Amount (Rs.) Net Amount (Rs.) 6974,700,230.10 30,350,000 667,350,230.10 132,196,639.70 5,938.621 126,258,018.70 294.619.507.24 211.307,000 83,312,507.24 5,19,00,000 (Five crores and nineteen lacs) 5,19,00,000 20,900,000 14,100,000 1,211,416,377.04 268,495,621 942,920,756.04 opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner by arguing that the allegations against the disclose a economic offence involving misappropriation of public funds Learned State counsel has iterated that have been routed connected with the petitioner and thereafter utilized Referring to reply dated 08.07.2026, by way of affidavit of Bhartendra Kumar, Deputy of Police, State Vigilance and Anti Corruption Bureau, is an crime. the Farm, beneficiaries into the accounts of Sanat Sunny Garg and Priyanka Garg), Swati Tomar accused including Samar Mohan Ranga (Petitioner) in Net Amount 667,350,230.10 126,258,018.70 83,312,507.24 942,920,756.04 AJAY KUMAR 2026.07.18 12:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- -31372-2026 9. That during investigation, it is revealed that the petitioner Samar Mohan Ranga was hand in glove with accused Pushpinder, Swati Tomar, Rajat Dahra etc. from the very initial stage of the conspiracy when one non-genuine/gorged bank account (Kotak Mahindra Bank, Sector – 11, Panchkula A/c No.2015073031) was opened in the name of Municipal Corporation, Panchkula by these accused persons on 21.05.2020 and few months thereafter the above mentioned embezzled money (Rs.5,19,00,000/-) started being siphoned into the joined account (No.115110100006348 Union Bank of India) of petitioner Mohan Ranga and his wife Neha Samar Ranga from the accounts of accused Kapil Kumar, Rajat Dahra, Swati Tomar and firms namely Agrotech (Director – Kulbir Bagri (Director – Priyanka Raijada) on various dates between 12.12.2023 as shown in the following table: Sr. No. Account Holder Name Account No. 1. SK Agro Farms 658920110000242 (Bank of India) 2. SK Agro Tech 3299201000347 (Canara Bank) 3. SK Agro Tech 3299201000347 (Canara Bank) 4. SK Agro Tech 3299201000347 (Canara Bank) 5. Rajat Dahra 47701508648 (ICICI Bank) 6. Kapil Kumar 10073794935 (IDFC Bank) 7. Rajat Dahra 3541000108247140 (PNB) 8. Rajat Dahra 3541000108247140 (PNB) 9. Rajat Dahra 3541000108247140 (PNB) 10. Swati Tomar 1183000101142310 (PNB) 5 That during investigation, it is revealed that the petitioner-accused was hand in glove with accused Pushpinder, Swati Tomar, Rajat Dahra etc. from the very initial stage of the conspiracy genuine/gorged bank account (Kotak Mahindra Bank, 11, Panchkula A/c No.2015073031) was opened in the name of pal Corporation, Panchkula by these accused persons on 21.05.2020 and few months thereafter the above mentioned embezzled ) started being siphoned into the joined account (No.115110100006348 Union Bank of India) of petitioner-accused Samar Mohan Ranga and his wife Neha Samar Ranga from the accounts of accused Kapil Kumar, Rajat Dahra, Swati Tomar and firms namely – Kulbir Bagri – demised) and SK Agro Farms Priyanka Raijada) on various dates between 17.03.2021 to 12.12.2023 as shown in the following table:- Account No. Date of Transaction Amount transferred in the account of petitioner 658920110000242 (Bank of India) 17.03.2021 20,00,000/- (Twenty lacs) 3299201000347 (Canara Bank) 18.03.2021 20,00,000/- (Twenty lacs) 3299201000347 (Canara Bank) 22.03.2021 20,00,000/- (Twenty lacs) 3299201000347 (Canara Bank) 23.03.2021 10,00,000/- (Ten lacs) 47701508648 (ICICI Bank) 13.07.2021 91,00,000/- (Ninety one lacs) 10073794935 (IDFC Bank) 31.07.2021 25,00,000/- (Twenty Five lacs) 3541000108247140 24.09.2021 60,00,000/- (Sixty lacs) 3541000108247140 02.11.2021 75,00,000/- (Seventy Five lacs) 3541000108247140 20.11.2021 25,00,000/- (Twenty Five lacs) 1183000101142310 29.11.2023 1,05,00,000/ (One crore and accused was hand in glove with accused Pushpinder, Swati Tomar, Rajat Dahra etc. from the very initial stage of the conspiracy genuine/gorged bank account (Kotak Mahindra Bank, 11, Panchkula A/c No.2015073031) was opened in the name of pal Corporation, Panchkula by these accused persons on 21.05.2020 and few months thereafter the above mentioned embezzled ) started being siphoned into the joined account Samar Mohan Ranga and his wife Neha Samar Ranga from the accounts of SK demised) and SK Agro Farms 17.03.2021 to transferred in the account of 20,00,000/- lacs) 20,00,000/- (Twenty lacs) 20,00,000/- (Twenty lacs) 10,00,000/- 91,00,000/- Ninety one 25,00,000/- (Twenty Five 60,00,000/- (Sixty lacs) 75,00,000/- (Seventy Five 25,00,000/- (Twenty Five 1,05,00,000/- (One crore and AJAY KUMAR 2026.07.18 12:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- -31372-2026 11 Swati Tomar 1183000101142310 (PNB) Total It is also relevant to mentioned here that recovery of above mentioned amount of Rs.5,19,00,000/ from the petitioner-accused Samar Mohan Ranga is still pending. 10. That during the investigation conducted so far, total 09 accused persons including Dalip Raghav, Pushpender, Vikas Kaushik, Rajat Dahra, Swati Tomar, Samar Mohan Ranga (Petitioner), Kapil have been arrested on various dates as shown in the following table alongwith present status of their custody Sr. No. Name of Accused 1. Dalip Raghav 2. Rajat Dahra 3. Kapil 4. Vikash Kaushik 5. Swati Tomar 6. Pushpender Singh 7. Sonia 8. Priyanka Raijada 9. Neha Samar Ranga It is relevant to mentioned here that two accused persons namely Kulbir Bagri (Proprietor/Director of SK Agro Tech) and Vinod Kumar have demised. Arrest of remaining accused persons namely Samar Mohan Range (Petitioner), Aryan Singh, Sunny Garg, Priyanka Garg, Satish Kumar and some officials of Municipal Corporation, Panchkula and Kotak Mahindra Bank involved in the case is still remaining. named accused Sunny Garg, Priyanka Garg and Satish Kumar are out of India and their LOC’s have been issued. Earnest efforts are being made by the answering respondent to arrest the aforesaid accused persons.” 6 Five lacs) 1183000101142310 12.12.2023 68,00,000/- (Sixty Eight lacs) 5,19,00,000/ (Five crore and Nineteen lacs) It is also relevant to mentioned here that recovery of above mentioned amount of Rs.5,19,00,000/- (Five Crores and Nineteen lacs) accused Samar Mohan Ranga is still pending. That during the investigation conducted so far, total 09 accused persons including Dalip Raghav, Pushpender, Vikas Kaushik, Rajat Dahra, Swati Tomar, Samar Mohan Ranga (Petitioner), Kapil and others, have been arrested on various dates as shown in the following table alongwith present status of their custody Date of Arrest Present status of custody 25.03.2026 In judicial custody 26.03.2026 In judicial custody 31.03.2026 In judicial custody 02.04.2026 In judicial custody 06.04.2026 In judicial custody 08.04.2026 In judicial custody 23.04.2026 In judicial custody 04.05.2026 In judicial custody 07.04.2026 In judicial custody It is relevant to mentioned here that two accused persons namely Kulbir Bagri (Proprietor/Director of SK Agro Tech) and Vinod Kumar demised. Arrest of remaining accused persons namely Samar Mohan Range (Petitioner), Aryan Singh, Sunny Garg, Priyanka Garg, Satish Kumar and some officials of Municipal Corporation, Panchkula and Kotak Mahindra Bank involved in the case is still remaining. The afore named accused Sunny Garg, Priyanka Garg and Satish Kumar are out of India and their LOC’s have been issued. Earnest efforts are being made by the answering respondent to arrest the aforesaid accused persons.” 68,00,000/- (Sixty Eight 5,19,00,000/- crores Nineteen It is also relevant to mentioned here that recovery of above (Five Crores and Nineteen lacs) That during the investigation conducted so far, total 09 accused persons including Dalip Raghav, Pushpender, Vikas Kaushik, Rajat and others, have been arrested on various dates as shown in the following table Present status of In judicial custody In judicial custody In judicial custody In judicial custody In judicial custody In judicial custody custody In judicial custody In judicial custody It is relevant to mentioned here that two accused persons namely – Kulbir Bagri (Proprietor/Director of SK Agro Tech) and Vinod Kumar demised. Arrest of remaining accused persons namely Samar Mohan Range (Petitioner), Aryan Singh, Sunny Garg, Priyanka Garg, Satish Kumar and some officials of Municipal Corporation, Panchkula and The afore- named accused Sunny Garg, Priyanka Garg and Satish Kumar are out of India and their LOC’s have been issued. Earnest efforts are being made AJAY KUMAR 2026.07.18 12:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- learned State counsel has contended that the numerous and complex necessary relevant documents and evidence. that releasing the ongoing investigation and potentially lead to tampering with evi influencing o dismissal 5. gone through the available record of the case. 6. Hon’ble Supreme Court titled as Punjab, 2025 INSC 320, -31372-2026 Raising submissions in tandem with the aforesaid reply, learned State counsel has contended that the numerous and complex for which custodial interrogation necessary to ascertain the money trail, identify b relevant documents and evidence. Learned State counsel has releasing the petitioner on bail at this crucial stage may hamper the ongoing investigation and potentially lead to tampering with evi influencing of witness(s). Accordingly, a prayer has been made for the dismissal of the instant petition. I have heard the learned counsel for the gone through the available record of the case. It would be apposite to refer herein to a ju Hon’ble Supreme Court titled as Devinder Kumar Bansal vs. The State of Punjab, 2025 INSC 320, relevant whereof reads as under: “21. The parameters for grant of anticipatory bail in a serious offence like corruption are required to besatisfi granted only in exceptional circumstances where the Court is prima facie of the view that the applicant has been falsely enroped in the crime or the allegations are politically motivated or are frivolous. So far as the case at hand is concerned, it cannot be said that any exceptional circumstances have been made out by the petitioner accused for grant of anticipatory bail and there is no frivolity in the prosecution. 22. In the aforesaid context, we may refer to a pronouncement in Central Bureau of Investigation v. V. Vijay Sai Reddy reported in (2013) 7 Scale 15, wherein this Court expressed thus: “28. While granting bail, the court has to keep in mind the nature of accusation, the nature of evidence in support thereof, the severity of the punishment which conviction will entail, the character of the accused, circumstances which are peculiar to the accused, reasonable possibility of securing the presence of the accused at the trial, reasonable apprehension of the witnesses 7 Raising submissions in tandem with the aforesaid reply, learned State counsel has contended that the transactions in question are custodial interrogation of the petitioner is to ascertain the money trail, identify beneficiaries and recover Learned State counsel has emphasized on bail at this crucial stage may hamper the ongoing investigation and potentially lead to tampering with evidence or Accordingly, a prayer has been made for the I have heard the learned counsel for the rival parties and have gone through the available record of the case. It would be apposite to refer herein to a judgment of the Devinder Kumar Bansal vs. The State of relevant whereof reads as under: The parameters for grant of anticipatory bail in a serious offence like corruption are required to besatisfied. Anticipatory bail can be granted only in exceptional circumstances where the Court is prima facie of the view that the applicant has been falsely enroped in the crime or the allegations are politically motivated or are frivolous. So far as the case at hand is concerned, it cannot be said that any exceptional circumstances have been made out by the petitioner accused for grant of anticipatory bail and there is no frivolity in the prosecution. In the aforesaid context, we may refer to a pronouncement in Central Bureau of Investigation v. V. Vijay Sai Reddy reported in (2013) , wherein this Court expressed thus: “28. While granting bail, the court has to keep in mind the nature usation, the nature of evidence in support thereof, the severity of the punishment which conviction will entail, the character of the accused, circumstances which are peculiar to the accused, reasonable possibility of securing the presence of the t the trial, reasonable apprehension of the witnesses Raising submissions in tandem with the aforesaid reply, transactions in question are of the petitioner is eneficiaries and recover emphasized on bail at this crucial stage may hamper the dence or Accordingly, a prayer has been made for the and have dgment of the Devinder Kumar Bansal vs. The State of The parameters for grant of anticipatory bail in a serious offence ed. Anticipatory bail can be granted only in exceptional circumstances where the Court is prima facie of the view that the applicant has been falsely enroped in the crime or the allegations are politically motivated or are frivolous. So far as the case at hand is concerned, it cannot be said that any exceptional circumstances have been made out by the petitioner accused for grant of anticipatory In the aforesaid context, we may refer to a pronouncement in Central Bureau of Investigation v. V. Vijay Sai Reddy reported in (2013) “28. While granting bail, the court has to keep in mind the nature usation, the nature of evidence in support thereof, the severity of the punishment which conviction will entail, the character of the accused, circumstances which are peculiar to the accused, reasonable possibility of securing the presence of the t the trial, reasonable apprehension of the witnesses AJAY KUMAR 2026.07.18 12:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- -31372-2026 being tampered with, the larger interests of the public/State and other similar considerations. It has also to be kept in mind that for the purpose of granting bail, the Legislature has used the words "reasonable grounds for believing" instead of "the evidence" which means the Court dealing with the grant of bail can only satisfy it as to whether there is a genuine case against the accused and that the prosecution will be able to produce prima facie evidence in support of the charge. It is not expected, at this stage, to have the evidence establishing the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.” 23. The presumption of innocence, by itself, cannot be thesole consideration for grant of anticipatory innocence is one of the considerations, which the court should keep in mind while considering the plea for anticipatory bail. The salutary rule is to balance the cause of the accused and the cause of public justice. Over solicitous homage to the accused’s liberty can, sometimes, defeat the cause of public justice. 24. If liberty is to be denied to an accused to ensure corruption free society, then the courts should not hesitate in denying such liberty. Where overwhelming considerations in the nature aforesaid require denial of anticipatory bail, it has to be denied. It is altogether a different thing to say that once the investigation is over and charge may consider to grant regular bail to a public serv indulging in corruption. 25. Avarice is a common frailty of mankind and Robert Walpole's famous pronouncement that all men have their price, notwithstanding the unsavoury cynicism that it suggests, is not very far from truth. As far back as more than two centuries ago, it was Burke who cautioned: “Among a people generally corrupt, liberty cannot last long”. In more recent years, Romain Rolland lamented that France fell because there was corruption without indignation. Corruption has, in i Corruption, a word of wide connotation has, in respect of almost all the spheres of our day to day life, all the world over, the limited meaning of allowing decisions and actions to be influenced not by the rights or wrongs of acase but by the prospects of monetary gains or other selfish considerations. 26. If even a fraction of what was the vox pupuli about the magnitude of corruption to be true, then it would not be far removed from the truth, that it is the rampant corruption indulged in with impunity by highly 8 being tampered with, the larger interests of the public/State and other similar considerations. It has also to be kept in mind that for the purpose of granting bail, the Legislature has used the words reasonable grounds for believing" instead of "the evidence" which means the Court dealing with the grant of bail can only satisfy it as to whether there is a genuine case against the accused and that the prosecution will be able to produce prima facie ence in support of the charge. It is not expected, at this stage, to have the evidence establishing the guilt of the accused beyond The presumption of innocence, by itself, cannot be thesole consideration for grant of anticipatory bail. The presumption of innocence is one of the considerations, which the court should keep in mind while considering the plea for anticipatory bail. The salutary rule is to balance the cause of the accused and the cause of public justice. Over s homage to the accused’s liberty can, sometimes, defeat the If liberty is to be denied to an accused to ensure corruption free society, then the courts should not hesitate in denying such liberty. Where rations in the nature aforesaid require denial of anticipatory bail, it has to be denied. It is altogether a different thing to say that once the investigation is over and charge-sheet is filed, the court may consider to grant regular bail to a public servant - accused of Avarice is a common frailty of mankind and Robert Walpole's famous pronouncement that all men have their price, notwithstanding the unsavoury cynicism that it suggests, is not very far from truth. As far back as more than two centuries ago, it was Burke who cautioned: “Among a people generally corrupt, liberty cannot last long”. In more recent years, Romain Rolland lamented that France fell because there was corruption without indignation. Corruption has, in it, very dangerous potentialities. Corruption, a word of wide connotation has, in respect of almost all the spheres of our day to day life, all the world over, the limited meaning of allowing decisions and actions to be influenced not by the rights or s of acase but by the prospects of monetary gains or other selfish If even a fraction of what was the vox pupuli about the magnitude of corruption to be true, then it would not be far removed from the truth, rruption indulged in with impunity by highly being tampered with, the larger interests of the public/State and other similar considerations. It has also to be kept in mind that for the purpose of granting bail, the Legislature has used the words reasonable grounds for believing" instead of "the evidence" which means the Court dealing with the grant of bail can only satisfy it as to whether there is a genuine case against the accused and that the prosecution will be able to produce prima facie ence in support of the charge. It is not expected, at this stage, to have the evidence establishing the guilt of the accused beyond The presumption of innocence, by itself, cannot be thesole bail. The presumption of innocence is one of the considerations, which the court should keep in mind while considering the plea for anticipatory bail. The salutary rule is to balance the cause of the accused and the cause of public justice. Over s homage to the accused’s liberty can, sometimes, defeat the If liberty is to be denied to an accused to ensure corruption free society, then the courts should not hesitate in denying such liberty. Where rations in the nature aforesaid require denial of anticipatory bail, it has to be denied. It is altogether a different thing to sheet is filed, the court accused of Avarice is a common frailty of mankind and Robert Walpole's famous pronouncement that all men have their price, notwithstanding the unsavoury cynicism that it suggests, is not very far from truth. As far back as more than two centuries ago, it was Burke who cautioned: “Among a people generally corrupt, liberty cannot last long”. In more recent years, Romain Rolland lamented that France fell because there was corruption t, very dangerous potentialities. Corruption, a word of wide connotation has, in respect of almost all the spheres of our day to day life, all the world over, the limited meaning of allowing decisions and actions to be influenced not by the rights or s of acase but by the prospects of monetary gains or other selfish If even a fraction of what was the vox pupuli about the magnitude of corruption to be true, then it would not be far removed from the truth, rruption indulged in with impunity by highly AJAY KUMAR 2026.07.18 12:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- 7. prosecution before this Court, indubitably, serious allegations have been levelled against the petitioner. a large scale Corporation investigation through various accounts and immovable properties. an intermediary in the alleged diversion and utilization of funds siphoned from the accounts of Municipal Corporation, Panchkula. During of investigation, it into account for purchase of various immovable properties in the names of family members and associates of the main accused Pushpinder Chaud property dealer and acted on the instructions of the co merit acceptance at this stage, as facie indicates that substantial amounts were routed connected with the petitioner and properties were purchased pursuant thereto. Whether the petitioner acted knowingly or innocently is a matter that can only be -31372-2026 placed persons that has led to economic unrest in this country. If one is asked to name one sole factor that effectively arrested the progress of our society to prosperity, undeniably it is corruption. If the so developing country faces a menace greater than even the one from the hired assassins to its law and order, then that is from the corrupt elements at the higher echelons of the Government and of the political parties. As per the material available on record and the stand of the prosecution before this Court, indubitably, serious allegations have been levelled against the petitioner. The allegations in the present case pertain to large scale financial fraud involving public funds of Municipa Corporation, Panchkula. The material collected during investigation prima facie reflects that huge amounts were transferred through various accounts and have been allegedly utilized for acquisition of immovable properties. The role attributed to the petitioner is that he acted as an intermediary in the alleged diversion and utilization of funds siphoned from the accounts of Municipal Corporation, Panchkula. During investigation, it has surfaced that substantial into account(s) connected with the petitioner and were for purchase of various immovable properties in the names of family members and associates of the main accused Pushpinder Chaudhary. The contention that the property dealer and acted on the instructions of the co merit acceptance at this stage, as the material indicates that substantial amounts were routed connected with the petitioner and properties were purchased pursuant thereto. Whether the petitioner acted knowingly or innocently is a matter only be determined after the completion of investigation/ 9 placed persons that has led to economic unrest in this country. If one is asked to name one sole factor that effectively arrested the progress of our society to prosperity, undeniably it is corruption. If the society in a developing country faces a menace greater than even the one from the hired assassins to its law and order, then that is from the corrupt elements at the higher echelons of the Government and of the political parties.” ilable on record and the stand of the prosecution before this Court, indubitably, serious allegations have been The allegations in the present case pertain to financial fraud involving public funds of Municipa Panchkula. The material collected during the course of that huge amounts were transferred allegedly utilized for acquisition of The role attributed to the petitioner is that he acted as an intermediary in the alleged diversion and utilization of funds siphoned from the accounts of Municipal Corporation, Panchkula. During the course surfaced that substantial amounts were transferred connected with the petitioner and were, thereafter, utilized for purchase of various immovable properties in the names of family members and associates of the main accused namely Pushpinder Singh @ contention that the petitioner is merely property dealer and acted on the instructions of the co-accused does not the material placed before the Court prima indicates that substantial amounts were routed through accounts connected with the petitioner and properties were purchased pursuant thereto. Whether the petitioner acted knowingly or innocently is a matter the completion of investigation/trial. It is placed persons that has led to economic unrest in this country. If one is asked to name one sole factor that effectively arrested the progress of our ciety in a developing country faces a menace greater than even the one from the hired assassins to its law and order, then that is from the corrupt elements ilable on record and the stand of the prosecution before this Court, indubitably, serious allegations have been The allegations in the present case pertain to financial fraud involving public funds of Municipal the course of that huge amounts were transferred allegedly utilized for acquisition of The role attributed to the petitioner is that he acted as an intermediary in the alleged diversion and utilization of funds siphoned the course amounts were transferred utilized for purchase of various immovable properties in the names of family Pushpinder Singh @ is merely a does not prima through accounts connected with the petitioner and properties were purchased pursuant thereto. Whether the petitioner acted knowingly or innocently is a matter It is AJAY KUMAR 2026.07.18 12:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- trite law that t granted as a matter of right particularly in cases involving serious economic offences. 8. evidence complex financial transactions require detailed investigation nature and extent of unearthed only through a free and fair inves involving public funds have far public administration. Such offences are committed with deliberate planning and affect public confidence in institutions. Therefore, they req stringent investigation in the present case material collected during investigation cannot be brushed aside as vague or baseless. 9. disputed question of fact and involves appreciation of evidence, which cannot be adjudicated upon at this stage. The same can only be adjudicated upon the conclusion of the investigation or during the course of trial. considered opinion of this Court, granting anticipatory bail at this stage may hamper the on shown, at this stage, from which it can be deciphered that the petitioner has been falsely imp has already declined the plea of the petitioner after considering the relevant factors, including the manner in which the name of the petitioner surfaced -31372-2026 trite law that the anticipatory bail is an extraordinary relief and is not to be granted as a matter of right particularly in cases involving serious economic The argument that the case is based solely on documentary evidence does not persuade this Court as the complex financial transactions require detailed investigation nature and extent of the involvement of the petitioner unearthed only through a free and fair inves involving public funds have far-reaching consequences on public administration. Such offences are committed with deliberate planning and affect public confidence in institutions. Therefore, they req approach while considering a prayer for anticipatory bail. investigation in the present case is at a crucial stage. material collected during investigation cannot be brushed aside as vague or baseless. The plea of false implication raised by the petitioner is a disputed question of fact and involves appreciation of evidence, which cannot be adjudicated upon at this stage. The same can only be adjudicated upon the conclusion of the investigation or during the course of trial. considered opinion of this Court, granting anticipatory bail at this stage may hamper the on-going investigation. No cause shown, at this stage, from which it can be deciphered that the petitioner has been falsely implicated into the present has already declined the plea of the petitioner after considering the relevant factors, including the manner in which the name of the petitioner surfaced 10 he anticipatory bail is an extraordinary relief and is not to be granted as a matter of right particularly in cases involving serious economic The argument that the case is based solely on documentary does not persuade this Court as the economic offences involving complex financial transactions require detailed investigation. The exact of the petitioner can be effectively unearthed only through a free and fair investigation. Economic offences reaching consequences on society and public administration. Such offences are committed with deliberate planning and affect public confidence in institutions. Therefore, they require a approach while considering a prayer for anticipatory bail. The a crucial stage. At this stage, the material collected during investigation cannot be brushed aside as vague or ication raised by the petitioner is a disputed question of fact and involves appreciation of evidence, which cannot be adjudicated upon at this stage. The same can only be adjudicated upon the conclusion of the investigation or during the course of trial. In the considered opinion of this Court, granting anticipatory bail at this stage may No cause nay plausible cause has been shown, at this stage, from which it can be deciphered that the petitioner has FIR. Furthermore, the trial Court has already declined the plea of the petitioner after considering the relevant factors, including the manner in which the name of the petitioner surfaced he anticipatory bail is an extraordinary relief and is not to be granted as a matter of right particularly in cases involving serious economic The argument that the case is based solely on documentary conomic offences involving The exact can be effectively Economic offences ociety and public administration. Such offences are committed with deliberate planning uire a The At this stage, the material collected during investigation cannot be brushed aside as vague or ication raised by the petitioner is a disputed question of fact and involves appreciation of evidence, which cannot be adjudicated upon at this stage. The same can only be adjudicated In the considered opinion of this Court, granting anticipatory bail at this stage may plausible cause has been shown, at this stage, from which it can be deciphered that the petitioner has trial Court has already declined the plea of the petitioner after considering the relevant factors, including the manner in which the name of the petitioner surfaced AJAY KUMAR 2026.07.18 12:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- during investigation. plea forgrant of anticipatory bail, the Court has to equilibrate between safeguarding individual rights and protecting societal interests. The Court ought to reckon with the magnitude and nature of the offence; the role attributed to the accused; the need for fair and free investigation as also the deeper and wide stage, there is no material on record to hold that made out against the pe the preliminary investigation, appear to establish a reasonable basis for the accusations. Thus, it is not appropriate to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, as it would necessarily cause impedimen investigation. In 1039, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held as under : (SCC p. 189, para 6) 10. and the grant of anticipatory bail at this juncture will impede the fair and -31372-2026 during investigation. It is befitting to mention here that while considering a plea forgrant of anticipatory bail, the Court has to equilibrate between safeguarding individual rights and protecting societal interests. The Court ought to reckon with the magnitude and nature of the offence; the role attributed to the accused; the need for fair and free investigation as also the deeper and wider impact of such alleged iniquities on the society. At this stage, there is no material on record to hold that made out against the petitioner. The material which has come on record and preliminary investigation, appear to establish a reasonable basis for the accusations. Thus, it is not appropriate to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, as it would necessarily cause impedimen investigation. In State v. Anil Sharma, (1997) 7 SCC 187 : 1997 SCC (Cri) , the Hon'ble Supreme Court held as under : (SCC p. 189, para 6) “6. We find force in the submission of CBI that custodial interrogation is qualitatively more elicitation-oriented than questioning a suspect who is well-ensconced with a favourable order under Section 438 of the Code. In a case like this, effective interrogation of a suspected person is of tremendous advantage in disinterring many useful informations materials which would have been concealed. Success in such interrogation would elude if the suspected person knows that he is well protected and insulated by a pre interrogated. Very often interrogation in a mere ritual. The argument that the custodial interrogation is fraught with the danger of the person being subjected to third need not be countenanced, for, such an argument can be advanced by all accused in all criminal cases. The Court has to presume that responsible police officers would conduct themselves in task of disintering offences would not conduct themselves as offenders. In the present case, the investigation is still at a crucial stage and the grant of anticipatory bail at this juncture will impede the fair and 11 ention here that while considering a plea forgrant of anticipatory bail, the Court has to equilibrate between safeguarding individual rights and protecting societal interests. The Court ought to reckon with the magnitude and nature of the offence; the role attributed to the accused; the need for fair and free investigation as also the impact of such alleged iniquities on the society. At this stage, there is no material on record to hold that a prima facie case is not titioner. The material which has come on record and preliminary investigation, appear to establish a reasonable basis for the accusations. Thus, it is not appropriate to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, as it would necessarily cause impediment in effective State v. Anil Sharma, (1997) 7 SCC 187 : 1997 SCC (Cri) , the Hon'ble Supreme Court held as under : (SCC p. 189, para 6) “6. We find force in the submission of CBI that custodial interrogation is oriented than questioning a suspect who is ensconced with a favourable order under Section 438 of the Code. In a case like this, effective interrogation of a suspected person is of tremendous advantage in disinterring many useful informations and also materials which would have been concealed. Success in such interrogation would elude if the suspected person knows that he is well protected and insulated by a pre-arrest bail order during the time he is interrogated. Very often interrogation in such a condition would reduce to a mere ritual. The argument that the custodial interrogation is fraught with the danger of the person being subjected to third-degree methods need not be countenanced, for, such an argument can be advanced by all all criminal cases. The Court has to presume that responsible police officers would conduct themselves in task of disintering offences would not conduct themselves as offenders.” In the present case, the investigation is still at a crucial stage and the grant of anticipatory bail at this juncture will impede the fair and ention here that while considering a plea forgrant of anticipatory bail, the Court has to equilibrate between safeguarding individual rights and protecting societal interests. The Court ought to reckon with the magnitude and nature of the offence; the role attributed to the accused; the need for fair and free investigation as also the impact of such alleged iniquities on the society. At this case is not titioner. The material which has come on record and preliminary investigation, appear to establish a reasonable basis for the accusations. Thus, it is not appropriate to grant anticipatory bail to the t in effective State v. Anil Sharma, (1997) 7 SCC 187 : 1997 SCC (Cri) “6. We find force in the submission of CBI that custodial interrogation is oriented than questioning a suspect who is ensconced with a favourable order under Section 438 of the Code. In a case like this, effective interrogation of a suspected person is of and also materials which would have been concealed. Success in such interrogation would elude if the suspected person knows that he is well arrest bail order during the time he is such a condition would reduce to a mere ritual. The argument that the custodial interrogation is fraught degree methods need not be countenanced, for, such an argument can be advanced by all all criminal cases. The Court has to presume that responsible police officers would conduct themselves in task of disintering offences In the present case, the investigation is still at a crucial stage and the grant of anticipatory bail at this juncture will impede the fair and AJAY KUMAR 2026.07.18 12:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- effective investigation. allegations, the specific role assigned, necessity of custodial interrogation considered opinion that the petitioner does not deserve the concession of anticipatory bail in the factual 11. (i) (ii) of opinion upon merits of the case/investigation. (iii) July 17, 202 Ajay -31372-2026 effective investigation. Considering the nature and seriousness of the allegations, the specific role assigned, the stage of investigation as also necessity of custodial interrogation of the petitioner considered opinion that the petitioner does not deserve the concession of anticipatory bail in the factual milieu of the case in hand. In view of the prevenient ratiocination, it is ordained thus: The instant petition is devoid of merits and is hereby dismissed. Nothing said hereinabove shall be deemed to be an expression of opinion upon merits of the case/investigation. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed off. 2026 Whether speaking/reasoned: Whether reportable: 12 Considering the nature and seriousness of the the stage of investigation as also of the petitioner, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner does not deserve the concession of of the case in hand. In view of the prevenient ratiocination, it is ordained thus: petition is devoid of merits and is hereby dismissed. Nothing said hereinabove shall be deemed to be an expression of opinion upon merits of the case/investigation. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed off. (SUMEET GOEL) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No Considering the nature and seriousness of the the , this Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner does not deserve the concession of petition is devoid of merits and is hereby dismissed. Nothing said hereinabove shall be deemed to be an expression AJAY KUMAR 2026.07.18 12:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document