CRM-M- 3296 IN THE (201) R RAVICHAN STATE OF HA CORAM: HO Present: Mr Mr No *** MANISHA BA 1. Th 482 of Bharati grant of anticip registered under Sanhita, 2023 (f 2. Bri that the aforem complaint subm Banking Corpo company”) a br under the New authorized to commercial ban 32960-2026 (O&M) 1 THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB CHANDIGARH CR Da HANDRAN Versus HARYANA AND ANOTHER HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MAN Mr. Shreenath A. Khemka, Advoca Mr. Neeraj Poswal, AAG, Haryana None for respondent No.2 **** A BATRA, J. (ORAL) The instant petition has been filed b haratiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, nticipatory bail in case arising out of under Sections 316(5) read with Sect 023 (for short “BNS”) at Police Statio Brief facts relevant for the purpose aforementioned FIR was registered t submitted by the authorized represe Corporation India (hereinafter to be ”) a branch of M/s American Express b e New York State Banking Law, d to carry on banking business in ial bank engaged in business of issu JAB AND HARYANA AT ARH CRM-M-32960-2026 (O&M) Date of decision : 21.08.2026 ... Petitioner ...Respondents MANISHA BATRA dvocate for the petitioner aryana filed by the petitioner under Section nhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) for out of FIR No.160 dated 06.12.2023 h Section 61 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Station DLF-II, Gurugram. urpose of disposal of this petition are istered on the basis of a written representative of American Express to be mentioned as “complainant press banking Corporation organized Law, alleging therein that it was ess in India and is a scheduled of issuance and servicing of credit ction for 2023 yaya are ritten press inant ized was uled redit AMIT SHARMA 2026.08.21 19:54 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M- 3296 cards, acceptan Express travelle Private Limited entered into an terminals deplo agreement. As company was r machines (POS card acceptan application dow terminal set up installation at th transactions on installed at the were properties same. These PO company for de The POS machi its different loca 3. As were entrusted till 2019 for t collection etc. T 32960-2026 (O&M) 2 ceptance of institutional deposits a ravellers cheques. It was alleged that imited (hereinafter to be mentione nto an agreement with the complain deployment servicing and collecti t. As per the terms of the agreemen was required to install American Ex (POS) with the permission of mercha eptance. The vendor was to be resp n download for all brands of termina set up details and parameterizations n at the merchant location terminal D ns on the credit cards issued by th at the business premises of the mer perties of the complainant bank who ese POS machines were entrusted to for deployment, servicing collection, machines were stored by the vendor nt locations. As per the further allegations, as usted to the accused company during for the purpose of POS machine etc. The accused company had given sits and distribution of American d that M/s Servpos Global Eservices ntioned as accused company) had mplainant bank on 25.11.2021 for ollection in accordance with the eement, the vendor i.e. the accused can Express points of sale terminal merchants and trained merchants for e responsible for terminal testing, erminals, development of terminals, zations, merchant training terminal Deinstallations etc. To facilitate by the bank, POS machines were merchants. These POS machines who had exclusive right over the to the vendor i.e. to the accused ction, as stipulated in the agreement. endor at its warehouses based out at ns, as many as 1301 POS machines during the period starting from 2014 achines deployment, servicing and given acknowledgement qua receipt rican vices had for the used inal s for ting, nals, inal litate were hines r the used ent. ut at hines 2014 and ceipt AMIT SHARMA 2026.08.21 19:54 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M- 3296 of these POS m machines was a complainant Ba intention to che loss to it and fo machines stored contravening th accused compan in original to th do so. Prayer company as wel 4. Aft initiated. Co- 25.12.2026. He present petitio Apprehending anticipatory ba Additional Sess 5. It i falsely implicat accused compan that he was in was signatory to 32960-2026 (O&M) 3 OS machines and about being in its p was approximately Rs.1,20,51,163/ ant Bank came to know that the accu to cheat the complainant and for the and for its own wrongful gains, had stored at the warehouse without any ing the terms of the agreement and c ompany was advised to immediately r l to the complainant Bank within a pe rayer was, therefore, made for takin as well as the petitioner who was Dire After registration of FIR, inv -accused Arjun Raju Ravichan 6. He suffered disclosure statemen petitioner, who was his father, w ding his arrest, the petitioner filed ry bail, which has been dismisse l Sessions Judge, Gurugram, vide orde It is argued by learned counsel for plicated in this case only by virtue ompany. He was not even named in t charge of the day-to-day conduct tory to the agreements executed with in its possession. The value of these ,163/-. However, in May 2022, the e accused company with mala fide or the purpose of causing wrongful s, had confiscated all the 1301 POS ut any rhyme or reason and thereby t and cheating the complainant. The iately return all the documents/assets in a period of 30 days but it failed to r taking action against the accused s Director of the same. , investigation proceedings were vichandran was apprehended on tement on the basis of which the her, was nominated as accused. filed an application for grant of smissed by the Court of learned de order dated 01.05.2026. sel for the petitioner that he has been virtue of his being a director in the ed in the FIR. There is no allegation nduct of business of the company or with the complainant company. He these , the fide ngful POS reby The ssets ed to used were on the used. t of rned been n the ation ny or . He AMIT SHARMA 2026.08.21 19:54 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M- 3296 is a 64-year-ol arisen out of an of contract. The offense punisha is based on do investigating ag son, has been e petitioner is not subject offenc him. He is not a be allowed. 6. Th has appeared on allegations agai accused compa with the compla execution and i receipt, assemb entrusted to the with the co-acc the rate of Rs. on his part to 32960-2026 (O&M) 4 old person suffering from sever t of an agreement and is of purely civ ct. These allegations do not make ou unishable under Section 409 of IPC a on documentary evidence which is ting agency. The co-accused Arjun R been extended benefit of regular bail. is not required as the investigation oth ffence is triable by Magistrate. No re s not a flight risk. It is, therefore, argu The complainant has appeared init red on its behalf today. Learned Sta s against the petitioner are serious i ompany and also authorized signator complainant company. He played an a and implementation of the contractu ssembly, servicing and distribution o to the accused company. He, in furthe accused, dishonestly retained those f Rs. 1,20,51,163/- and failed to retur art to do so. It is, therefore, argued several ailments. The dispute has ivil nature, amounting to breach ke out any case for commission of IPC as against him. The entire case ich is already in possession of the rjun Raju Ravichandran, who is his r bail. Custodial interrogation of the ion otherwise stands completed. The No recovery is to be effected from argued that the petition deserves to ed initially through counsel but none ed State counsel has argued that the rious in nature. He was director of ignatory to the agreements executed d an active and instrumental role in ntractual arrangements pertaining to ution of 1301 POS/ATM machines furtherance of his common intention those entrusted machines valued at o return the same despite obligation rgued that for conducting thorough has each n of case f the s his f the . The from es to none t the or of uted le in g to hines ntion ed at ation ough AMIT SHARMA 2026.08.21 19:54 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M- 3296 investigation, h the petition doe 7. Th counsel for the p 8. Ad director of the c been presented. case of the pros of the petitione contract. It is commission of the nature of the facts and circum that custodial in proposition of l conviction sent out in favour petitioner is ord joining investig date of receipt o released on bail surety bonds to 32960-2026 (O&M) 5 tion, his custodial interrogation is mus n does not deserve to be allowed. This Court has heard the rival s or the parties at considerable length. Admittedly, investigation qua the f the company, stands concluded and ented. The case rests upon document e prosecution that any document has t titioner. The allegations prima facie It is a matter of evidence as to on of subject offence are attracted or of the allegations as leveled against t circumstances of the case, this Cour dial interrogation of the petitioner is n of law that pre-trial incarceration sh n sentencing. As such a case for gran of the petitioner. Accordingly, is ordered to be extended benefit of a vestigation and surrendering within ceipt of a certified copy of this order a n bail by the Investigating Officer on nds to his satisfaction and on the follow must, and hence it is stressed that rival submissions made by learned a the co-accused, who was another ed and even challan against him has umentary evidence and it is not the t has to be recovered at the instance cie make out a case of breach of as to whether the ingredients for ted or not. Taking into consideration ainst the petitioner and the attendant Court is of the considered opinion ner is not required. It is well-settled tion should not be replicated as post- r grant of anticipatory bail is made the petition is allowed and the fit of anticipatory bail, subject to his ithin a period of 10 days from the order and upon doing so, he shall be cer on furnishing personal as well as following conditions :- that rned r has t the tance h of for ation dant inion ttled - ade d the o his the ll be ell as AMIT SHARMA 2026.08.21 19:54 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M- 3296 9. It i not be construed case and shall n 10. Sin any, is rendered 21.08.2026 Amit Sharma 32960-2026 (O&M) 6 i. The petitioner shall m interrogation before the Inv required. ii. That the petitioner shall no any inducement, threat, acquainted with the facts o him/her from disclosing suc police officer. iii. The petitioner shall not lea permission of the Court an if any, with the Investigatin iv. The petitioner shall not com offence of which he is a commission of which he is s v. The petitioner shall provide as present address to the Inv vi. The petitioner shall give co card, if any and details of h the Investigating Officer. It is, however, clarified that the o nstrued as an expression of opinion of shall not influence the outcome of the t Since the main petition has been ndered infructuous. (M Whether speaking/reasoned:- Whether reportable:- Yes/No ll make himself available for he Investigating Officer as and when hall not, directly or indirectly, make reat, or promise to any person facts of the case so as to dissuade ing such facts to the Court or to any not leave the country without prior urt and shall surrender his passport, tigating Officer. ot commit an offence similar to the e is accused or suspected of the he is suspected. rovide his permanent address as well the Investigating Officer. give copy of his Aadhar Card, PAN ls of his mobile phone numbers(s) to t the observations made above shall ion of this Court on the merits of the of the trial in any manner. allowed, pending application, if (MANISHA BATRA) JUDGE - Yes/No for hen ake rson uade any prior port, o the the well PAN (s) to shall f the n, if AMIT SHARMA 2026.08.21 19:54 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.