Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2025 DAILYLAW 122995 (PNJ)

SHUBHANSHU UPADDYAY v. STATE OF HARYANA

CRM-M/63883/2025 · 2025-12-19

Rupinderjit Chahal

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

CRM-M-63883 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA 213 SHUBHANSHU UPADDYAY STATE OF CORAM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL Present:- RUPINDERJIT 1. Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (For short “BNSS”), the petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in case registered under Sections 318(4), 336 Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, at Police Station Sector Gurugram. 2. 63883-2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH SHUBHANSHU UPADDYAY Versus STATE OF HARYANA HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL Dr. Amardeep Singh Sandhu, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Mohit Chaudhary, AAG, Haryana. Mr. Mukul Bura, Advocate with Ms. Palkin Bhardwaj, Advocate, for the complainant. ***** RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL, J. (ORAL) Through the instant petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (For short “BNSS”), the petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in case registered under Sections 318(4), 336(3), 338, 340(2), 238 and 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, at Police Station Sector On 02.12.2025, following order “Prayer in the present petition filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.292 dated 06.10.2025 registered under Sections 318(4), 336(3), 338, 340(2), 238 and 61(2) of the Bharatiya -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-63883-2025 Date of decision: 19.12.2025 ….Petitioner ....Respondent HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL Dr. Amardeep Singh Sandhu, Advocate Mr. Mohit Chaudhary, AAG, Haryana. Mr. Mukul Bura, Advocate with Ms. Palkin Bhardwaj, Advocate, Through the instant petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (For short “BNSS”), the petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in case FIR No.292 dated 06.10.2025 (3), 338, 340(2), 238 and 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, at Police Station Sector-50, District .2025, following order was passed: - Prayer in the present petition filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.292 dated 06.10.2025 registered under Sections 318(4), 336(3), 338, 340(2), 238 and 61(2) of the Bharatiya - Petitioner ....Respondent Through the instant petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (For short “BNSS”), the FIR No.292 dated 06.10.2025 (3), 338, 340(2), 238 and 61(2) of the 50, District Prayer in the present petition filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.292 dated 06.10.2025 registered under Sections GURPREET 2025.12.22 18:35 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document. CRM-M-63883 Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, at Police Station Sector petitioner in connivance with other co planned conspiracy, had cheated the complainant for a sum of petitioner has been falsely implicated in further contends that the petitioner was neither named in the prosecution. He further argues that the petitioner has been petitioner with petitioner was merely working as driver further argues that the main allegations and role is attributed to 63883-2025 Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, at Police Station Sector Gurugram. Status report filed by learned State counsel, in Court today, is taken on record. Brief facts as per the case of the prosecution are that the petitioner in connivance with other co planned conspiracy, had cheated the complainant for a sum of Rs.66 lakhs by preparing forged and fabricated documents to sell three units in TLC. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in further contends that the petitioner was neither named in the FIR nor has any concern with the alleged offence. He argues that in fact, the dealing of the complainant was with Ankur Bishnoi but ironically he has been exonerated by the prosecution. He further argues that the petitioner has been nominated as an accused only on the basis of the disclosure statement made by co-accused Ram Sharan. Apart disclosure statement, there is no other evidence to connect the petitioner with the offence in question and it is a trite law that disclosure statement of the co interrogation is not admissible. He further argues that the petitioner was merely working as driver co-accused Ram Sharan and was neither beneficiary to the alleged transactions nor received even a single penny. He further argues that the main allegations and role is attributed to co-accused Ankur Bishnoi and Ram Sharan, who are the beneficiary of the alleged transactions. He if the contents of the FIR are taken to be true, even then no specific role has been attributed to the present petitioner and his name has been dragged in the FIR solely on the disclosure statement of co-accused Ram Sharnan who has ma contradictory statements. Moreover, the petitioner has clean -2- Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, at Police Station Sector-50, District Status report filed by learned State counsel, in Court Brief facts as per the case of the prosecution are that the petitioner in connivance with other co-accused, under a pre- planned conspiracy, had cheated the complainant for a sum of Rs.66 lakhs by preparing forged and fabricated documents to Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further contends that the petitioner was neither named in the FIR nor has any concern with the alleged offence. He argues that in fact, the dealing of the complainant was with Ankur Bishnoi but ironically he has been exonerated by the prosecution. He further argues that the petitioner has been nominated as an accused only on the basis of the disclosure accused Ram Sharan. Apart from the disclosure statement, there is no other evidence to connect the the offence in question and it is a trite law that disclosure statement of the co-accused during his custodial interrogation is not admissible. He further argues that the petitioner was merely working as driver-cum-security guard of and was neither beneficiary to the alleged transactions nor received even a single penny. He further argues that the main allegations and role is attributed to accused Ankur Bishnoi and Ram Sharan, who are the beneficiary of the alleged transactions. He further submits that if the contents of the FIR are taken to be true, even then no specific role has been attributed to the present petitioner and his name has been dragged in the FIR solely on the disclosure accused Ram Sharnan who has made contradictory statements. Moreover, the petitioner has clean - 50, District Status report filed by learned State counsel, in Court Brief facts as per the case of the prosecution are that the - planned conspiracy, had cheated the complainant for a sum of Rs.66 lakhs by preparing forged and fabricated documents to Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the the present case. He further contends that the petitioner was neither named in the FIR nor has any concern with the alleged offence. He argues that in fact, the dealing of the complainant was with Ankur Bishnoi but ironically he has been exonerated by the prosecution. He further argues that the petitioner has been nominated as an accused only on the basis of the disclosure from the disclosure statement, there is no other evidence to connect the the offence in question and it is a trite law that accused during his custodial interrogation is not admissible. He further argues that the security guard of and was neither beneficiary to the alleged transactions nor received even a single penny. He further argues that the main allegations and role is attributed to accused Ankur Bishnoi and Ram Sharan, who are the further submits that if the contents of the FIR are taken to be true, even then no specific role has been attributed to the present petitioner and his name has been dragged in the FIR solely on the disclosure de GURPREET 2025.12.22 18:35 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document. CRM-M-63883 for a sum of Rs.66 lakhs by preparing forged and fabricated prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, has petitioner shall also abide by the conditions as envisaged under 3. the order dated investigation. 4. Ali, has submitted that the petitioner has joined the investigation and is longer required for further investigation. 63883-2025 antecedents as he is not involved in any other case. No recovery is to be effected from the petitioner. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner is ready and willing to join investigation as and when called upon to do so by the investigating agency. On the other hand, learned State counsel while referring to the status report, has opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail, by submitting that the allegations levelle against the petitioner are serious in nature. He has further submitted that the petitioner, in connivance with co Ram Sharan, hatched conspiracy and duped the complainant for a sum of Rs.66 lakhs by preparing forged and fabricated documents. Learned counsel for the complainant, while opposing the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, has contended that the petitioner has played an active role in the crime and, thus, does not deserve the concession of bail. Adjourned to 19.12.2025. In the meantime, the petitioner is directed to join investigation within a week from today and would appear as and when required by the Investigating Officer and cooperate with the Investigating Agency. In the event of arrest, he shall be admitted to interim bail on furnishing of bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of Arresting/Investigating Officer. The petitioner shall also abide by the conditions as envisaged under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023.” Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the order dated 02.12.2025 passed by this Court, the petitioner has joined the investigation. Learned counsel for the State, on instructions from , has submitted that the petitioner has joined the investigation and is longer required for further investigation. -3- antecedents as he is not involved in any other case. No recovery is to be effected from the petitioner. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner is ready and willing to join the investigation as and when called upon to do so by the On the other hand, learned State counsel while referring to the status report, has opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail, by submitting that the allegations levelled against the petitioner are serious in nature. He has further submitted that the petitioner, in connivance with co-accused Ram Sharan, hatched conspiracy and duped the complainant for a sum of Rs.66 lakhs by preparing forged and fabricated ned counsel for the complainant, while opposing the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, has petitioner has played an active role in the crime and, thus, does not deserve the concession of bail. 25. In the meantime, the petitioner is directed to join investigation within a week from today and would appear as and when required by the Investigating Officer and cooperate with the Investigating Agency. In the event of arrest, he shall be interim bail on furnishing of bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of Arresting/Investigating Officer. The petitioner shall also abide by the conditions as envisaged under Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in compliance of this Court, the petitioner has joined the Learned counsel for the State, on instructions from ASI Barkat , has submitted that the petitioner has joined the investigation and is no - antecedents as he is not involved in any other case. No recovery is to be effected from the petitioner. Learned counsel further the investigation as and when called upon to do so by the On the other hand, learned State counsel while referring to the status report, has opposed the prayer for grant of d against the petitioner are serious in nature. He has further accused Ram Sharan, hatched conspiracy and duped the complainant for a sum of Rs.66 lakhs by preparing forged and fabricated ned counsel for the complainant, while opposing the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, has petitioner has played an active role in the In the meantime, the petitioner is directed to join investigation within a week from today and would appear as and when required by the Investigating Officer and cooperate with the Investigating Agency. In the event of arrest, he shall be interim bail on furnishing of bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of Arresting/Investigating Officer. The petitioner shall also abide by the conditions as envisaged under in compliance of this Court, the petitioner has joined the Barkat no GURPREET 2025.12.22 18:35 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document. CRM-M-63883 5. interim order dated continue to join investigation, as and when called by the Investigating Officer and shall also abide by the conditions as provided under Section 482(2) of the BNSS. 19.12.2025 Gurpreet 63883-2025 In view of the statement made by learned State counsel, the interim order dated 02.12.2025 is made absolute. The petitioner shall continue to join investigation, as and when called by the Investigating Officer and shall also abide by the conditions as provided under Section 482(2) of the BNSS. i) Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No `ii) Whether reportable? Yes/No -4- In view of the statement made by learned State counsel, the .2025 is made absolute. The petitioner shall continue to join investigation, as and when called by the Investigating Officer and shall also abide by the conditions as provided under Section (RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL) JUDGE i) Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No - In view of the statement made by learned State counsel, the .2025 is made absolute. The petitioner shall continue to join investigation, as and when called by the Investigating Officer and shall also abide by the conditions as provided under Section (RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL) GURPREET 2025.12.22 18:35 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document.