CRM-M- IN 290 Bhagat Pre Vers State of Pun CORAM: Present: AARADHN 1. under Sect against him petition for 2. noticed her complaint d caretaker i Najeb Ami -33275-2024 -1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA CHANDIGA at Preet Singh Versus of Punjab AM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE AA Mr. GBS Dhillon, Senior Adv Mr. Jagdeep S. Bajwa, Advoca Mr. Hardeep Hans, Assistant A Mr. Rahul Bhargava, Advocate Ms. Reetika Sabharwal, Advoc **** ADHNA SAWHNEY, J. (Oral) Petitioner, an accused in case r Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 506 st him at Police Station Sarabha Naga ion for grant of anticipatory bail. Relevant facts as emerging fr ed hereinbelow:- Criminal proceedings in the pr int dated 29.1.2024 moved by Dani ker in India of three Afghanistan co Amin Ltd. and Noor Ahmad Baher 1- PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT DIGARH CRM-M-33275-2024 Date of Decision: 13.11.2025 …Petitioner. …Respondent. CE AARADHNA SAWHNEY. or Advocate with dvocate for the petitioner. stant Advocate General, Punjab. vocate with Advocate for the complainant. n case FIR No. 0006 dated 29.01.202 , 506 of Indian Penal Code, registere a Nagar, Ludhiana, has filed the prese ging from the documents on record b he present case were registered on th anish Irfan Aaga, who claimed to b n companies, namely, Tak Dry Fru aher Ahmade Ltd., dealing in impor .2025 .2024, gistered present cord be on the to be Fruit, mport, GURBACHAN SINGH 2025.11.18 09:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- export of d between P Dzhamil w MK Road connection further alle with within deposited Thereafter, petitioner, was deposi Najeb Am petitioner 297063.40. the compan by Noor Ah dry fruits s not deposit needful wo since the m same is so months, p companies stopped att on 17.10.20 -33275-2024 -2 of dry fruits in different countries. I n President of Tak Dry Fruit C il with petitioner-Bhagat Preet Sin oad, Guru Harkrishan Nagar, tion with business of dry fruits. I alleged in the complaint, petitioner ithin three days of receipt of the m ted by him in the account of abo fter, the dry fruits worth Rs.5 crores ner, namely, M/s Fresh Nuts Overse posited by petitioner. Complainan Amin Ltd., Afghanistan supplied ner on 197.2023, 7.9.2023, 12.9 3.40. Tak Dry Fruit Company, Afgh mpany of petitioner on various date r Ahmad Baher Ahmad Ltd. on 20 its supplied to petitioner was Rs.7. posited by petitioner despite the fact l would be done. On some occasion he material supplied to him has not is sold, the money would be depos s, petitioner whose intention wa nies from whom he had received d attending the calls. It is further t 10.2023, a fake statement of Swift M 2- . In June, 2023, a meeting was he uit Company, namely, Mukhamma t Singh, resident of L-6, Hazi Stree ar, Khanna, District Ludhiana, s. In the said meeting, as has bee oner Bhagat Preet Singh had assure the material, the payments would b above mentioned three companie rores was delivered to the company verseas. The payment of Rs.5 cror inant next pointed out that thereaft lied dry fruits to the company 12.9.2023 and 6.11.2023 for US Afghanistan also supplied dry fruits dates followed by supply of dry frui n 20.8.2023. In all the total value s.7.18 crores. The said amount wa fact that he kept on assuring that th asions, petitioner also threatened th not been sold and that whenever th eposited. After buying time for fe was to cheat three Afghanista ved dry fruits worth Rs.7.18 crore er the allegation of complainant th ift Message MT-103 of Axis Bank Lt s held mmad Street, a, in s been ssured uld be anies. any of crores eafter ny of USD uits to fruits lue of nt was at the d that er the r few nistan rores, nt that k Ltd. GURBACHAN SINGH 2025.11.18 09:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- was sent b fruits of U Ahmad Bah Axis Bank, deposited Commissio petitioner compromis petitioner d was to be compromis payment w that apart deposited i conditions 23.1.2024 cheated the Rs.7.18 cro 0006 dated Penal Cod Ludhiana grant of pr Sessions Ju which, pres -33275-2024 -3 nt by petitioner indicating that he h of USD 63600, which were supplie Bahar Ahmad Ltd. However, when ank, the code was found to be fake ted by petitioner. On 22.1.202 issioner of Police, Ludhiana. In ner and his other accomplice visit omise was arrived at between the ner deposited Rs.19 lakhs in the acc be deposited on 24.1.2024. As ag omise, only Rs.11 lakhs was depos nt was also not made. Thus, in crux art from sending a forged Swift Co ted in the account of M/s Noor Ahm ions of the subsequent compromise 024 were also not adhered to by p d the three Afghanistan companies, w 8 crores. On the basis of said comp ated 29.01.2024, under Sections 42 Code, was registered against him a na. Apprehending his arrest, peti of pre-arrest bail. The same was ions Judge, Ludhiana in terms of orde , present petition has been filed. 3- he had deposited the payment of d pplied to him on 20.8.2023 by Noo when the statement was checked fro fake and in fact no money had bee .2024, a complaint was made In pursuance of which, prese visited Ludhiana. On 23.1.2024 the parties. In pursuance theret account of complainant. Rs.31 lakh s against the terms and conditions eposited by petitioner. Even furth crux, the allegation of complainant t Code assuring that money has bee Ahmad Baher Ahmad, the terms an ise arrived at between the parties o by petitioner, who thus, intentional , who had supplied dry fruits wor omplaint, a formal case vide FIR N ns 420, 467, 468, 471, 506 of India im at Police Station Sarabha Naga t, petitioner moved an application fo was dismissed by learned Addition f order dated 19.2.2024. Aggrieved o of dry Noor d from been de to resent 24, a ereto, lakhs ons of urther ant is s been s and ies on onally worth IR No. Indian agar, tion for ditional ieved of GURBACHAN SINGH 2025.11.18 09:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- 3. been falsely levelled in nature has harass the Continuing Officer of M fruits for th market. He companies November, consumptio the substan companies refused to m investigatio highhanded the fact tha who were were also a proprietor o concession Code was -33275-2024 -4 Learned counsel for the petit falsely implicated in the present case. led in the FIR would reveal that the di e has deliberately been given a crim s the petitioner and to extract illeg inuing further, learned counsel conten of M/s Fresh Nuts Overseas, has be for the last ten years. He has earned et. He had been regularly making pay anies but the consignment which wer mber, 2023 were totally substan umption. It was only when the retailer ubstandard quantity of dry fruits, pe anies to take back the material point ed to make the payment. It is also the submission tigation in the present case has be handedness on the part of the Investig hat the wholesalers to whom the were never in direct contact with th also arrayed as accused. Precisely, fo rietor of Knight Trading Company Kh ession of bail by the learned Additiona Learned counsel for the petit was generated by petitioner was n 4- e petitioner submits that petitioner ha t case. A bare perusal of the allegation the dispute being purely commercial a criminal colour only with a view t illegal monetary benefit from him ontends that petitioner-Chief Executiv has been dealing in the business of dr earned a good name for himself in th ng payment to all the three Afghanista ch were sent in September, October an ubstandard and not fit for huma retailers informed the wholesalers abo its, petitioner requested the said thre l pointing out that the wholesalers ha ission of learned counsel that th has been far from satisfactory. Th vestigating Officer can be gauged fro m the dry fruits had been supplied an with the three Afghanistan companie ely, for the said reason, Raman Khann any Khari Baoli, Delhi was granted th ditional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana. e petitioner next contends that a Swi was not fake. In any case, the sa ner has egations ercial in view to m him. xecutive s of dry lf in the hanistan ber and human rs about id three lers had hat the . The ed from lied and panies, Khanna, nted the a Swift the said GURBACHAN SINGH 2025.11.18 09:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- question of evidence. concession Court, he n order dated 4. learned cou the attentio Murad Jasv Ludhiana, w the FIR in entered in Afghanistan back on hi From the m to be know Code indic accounts w learned cou crores has b of non-com needed for dismissal o -33275-2024 -5 tion of fact can only be decided after nce. It is also the submission of ession of anticipatory bail was granted t, he never misused the same. Thus, r dated 29.7.2024. Per Contra, while opposing ed counsel for complainant as also le ttention of this Court to the Status R d Jasvir Singh Gill, PPS, Assistant , wherein, apart from reiterating t IR including the fact that after the c ed into a compromise with the c anistan companies in India and assure on his promise and did not adhere the material collected during the cou known that petitioner had in fact sent indicating that payment had been unts were checked, the code was found Thus, while opposing the requ ed counsel for the complainant conte s has been intentionally committed by compliance of commercial agreem ed for custodial interrogation to reco issal of the petition has been made. 5- d after the parties lead their respectiv ion of learned counsel that after th ranted to petitioner on 29.7.2024 by th Thus, prayer has been made to confir posing the petition for grant of bai also learned State counsel have draw Report filed by way of affidavit o istant Commissioner of Police (West ating the facts leading to the lodging o r the complaint was lodged, petition the complainant, caretaker of thre assured to make the payment, but we dhere to terms and conditions thereo he course of investigation, it also cam ct sent a forged Swift Message MT-10 been made. However, when ban ound to be fake. e request for grant of anticipatory bai contends that a huge fraud of Rs.7.1 tted by petitioner, it is not a simple cas agreement. Presence of petitioner, o recover the said amount. Prayer fo spective fter the by this confirm of bail, e drawn t of (West), dging of etitioner f three ut went thereof. so came 103 n bank ory bail, Rs.7.18 ple case , is ayer for GURBACHAN SINGH 2025.11.18 09:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- 5. documents 6. the counse Hon’ble Su dealing wi discussed. 7. Directorate -33275-2024 -6 Heard learned counsel for th ments on record. Before expressing any opinio counsels, it would be appropriate to ble Supreme Court, wherein the fa ng with an application for grant o ssed. Hon’ble the Supreme Cou orate of Enforcement, (2020) 13 SC “67. Ordinarily, arrest is investigation to secure not onl several other purposes. Power is an extraordinary power an sparingly. The privilege of the only in exceptional cases. T upon the court has to be prope mind as to the nature and gra of applicant fleeing justice an it is a fit case for grant anticipatory bail to some ex investigation of an offence circumspect while exercisin anticipatory bail. Anticipator matter of rule and it has to b 6- for the parties and have perused th opinion on submissions raised by bo iate to refer to certain judgments o the factors to be kept in mind whi rant of anticipatory bail, have bee Court in “P. Chidambaram v 3 SCC 791), has observed as under: is a part of procedure of th t only the presence of the accused b ower under Section 438 Cr.P.C 197 r and the same has to be exercise f the pre-arrest bail should be grante s. The judicial discretion conferre roperly exercised after application gravity of the accusation; possibili e and other factors to decide wheth ant of anticipatory bail. Grant e extent interferes in the sphere nce and hence, the court must b cising such power for grant atory bail is not to be granted as to be granted only when the court sed the by both ents of d while e been m vs. nder:- f the ed but 1973 rcised ranted erred tion of ibility hether nt of ere of st be nt of as a ourt is GURBACHAN SINGH 2025.11.18 09:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- 8. “Ms. X Vs. “Ms. X Vs. 279) held a -33275-2024 -7 convinced that exceptional cir extraordinary remedy.” Hon’ble the Supreme Court w Vs. The State of Maharashtra and held as under:- “11.1. We propose to take a that ought to govern grant of a of decisions of this court tha while deciding an application from undertaking a detailed a being on the prima facie issue reasonable grounds that woul committed the offence or thos seriousness of the offence. The deep into the analysis of the e reasons, namely, to prevent an the prosecution or the defence and to keep all aspects of t concluded. 12. In Prasanta Kumar Sa Kumar Sarkar Vs. Ashish Ch Bench of this Court had highli borne in mind while con application and had stated tha "9. We are of the opinion tha unsustainable. It is trite that 7- l circumstances exist to resort to th ourt while deciding the case titled a and another” (2023 SCC Online S e a quick look at the consideration t of anticipatory bail. There are a lin that have underscored the fact th tion for bail, the court ought to refra ed analysis of the evidence, the focu ssues including consideration of som would go to show if the accused ha those facts that would reflect on th . The self-imposed restraint on delvin the evidence at that stage is for val nt any prejudice to the case set up b ence likely to be taken by the accuse of the matter open till the trial r Sarkar's case (supra) (Prasan h Chatterjee and another), a Divisio ighlighted the factors that ought to b considering the anticipatory ba that :- n that the impugned order is clear that this Court does not, normall to that titled as ne SC ations a line ct that efrain focus f some d has on the elving valid up by cused rial is asanta ivision t to be bail learly mally, GURBACHAN SINGH 2025.11.18 09:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- 9. The State Supreme C ought not t 10. including and again r to take int accused tam justice etc. -33275-2024 -8 interfere with an order passe rejecting bail to the accused. upon the High Court to exe cautiously and strictly in com laid down in a plethora of dec It is well settled that, among o be borne in mind while conside (i) whether there is any prim believe that the accused had co (ii) nature and gravity of the a (iii)severity of the punishment (iv)danger of the accused abs bail; (v) character, behaviour, mea accused; (vi) likelihood of the offence be (vii) reasonable apprehension and (viii) danger, of course, of just bail.” In Nikita Jagganath Shetty @ tate of Maharashtra and another, eme Court held that “Anticipatory ba not to be granted in a routine manne Hon’ble Supreme Court in ding Gurbaksh Singh v. State of Pun gain reiterated that while considering ke into consideration the facts like sed tampering with the evidence and e etc. Court should be circumspect a 8- assed by the High Court granting o sed. However, it is equally incumbe exercise its discretion judiciousl compliance with the basic principl f decisions of this Court on the poin ng other circumstances, the factors nsidering an application for bail are prima facie or reasonable ground ad committed the offence; he accusation; ent in the event of conviction; absconding or fleeing, if released o means, position and standing of th ce being repeated; sion of the witnesses being influence justice being thwarted by grant of etty @ Nikita Vishwajeet Jadhav v her, 2025 AIR SC 3375, the Hon’b ry bail is an exceptional remedy an nner.” rt in plethora of judicial preceden Punjab, AIR 1980 SC 1632, has tim dering the anticipatory bail the Court s like gravity of offence, chances o e and probabilities of his fleeing fro pect about the impact of its decision o ing or mbent iously, ciples point. tors to l are: und to sed on of the enced; of av vs. Hon’ble y and cedents has time Court is nces of ng from ision on GURBACHAN SINGH 2025.11.18 09:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- the society which shou 11. have alread against the M/s Fresh companies. initially kep done. But Swift Code checked up petitioner companies, wholesalers in the light for him to sometime a been made and the ma remains ine not his ple appropriate accused A petitioner i themselves interim ord -33275-2024 -9 ociety as well. The anticipatory ba h should be exercised in the extraordin Factual aspects of the case lea already been noticed in para 2 of th st the petitioner is that dry fruits wort Fresh Nuts Overseas, (of which he anies. However, he did not make the lly kept on buying time and assuring c But after sometime, he stopped at t Code was sent indicating that pay ked up from Bank, the same was foun ioner that substandard dry fruits w anies, which fact was brought to his esalers also seems to be an after thoug e light of documents on record. Had m to initially request the three Afgh time and thereafter to send a Swift C made. Further still, when the comp the matter was enquired into by the ins inexplicable as to why petitioner is plea that he was compelled to sett opriate to point out that the compromi sed Ajay Bansal (petitioner in CR ioner is of no consequence at all, fo selves as to how much amount is due im order dated 7.6.2024 passed by l 9- ory bail is an extraordinary discretio aordinary circumstances. se leading to the registration of the FI of the order. In brief, the allegatio s worth Rs.7.18 crores were supplied h he is CEO) from three Afghanista ake the payment despite the fact that h ring complainant that needful would b ped attending the calls. Thereafter, at payment had been made but whe s found to be ‘fake’. The plea taken b uits was supplied by the said thre to his knowledge by other retailers an r thought, particularly when appreciate Had it been so, there was no occasio e Afghanistan companies to grant hi wift Code indicating that payment ha complaint was lodged by complaina y the police authorities at Ludhiana, tioner entered into a compromise. It to settle the dispute. It would also b promise, if any, arrived at between in CRM-M-38159-2024) and prese all, for, how they can decide betwee is due to complainant. Moreover, in th by learned Additional Sessions Judg scretion the FIR legation plied to hanistan t that he ould be eafter, a t when aken by d three lers and reciated ccasion ant him ent has plainant hiana, it e. It is also be co- present between r, in the s Judge, GURBACHAN SINGH 2025.11.18 09:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- Ludhiana ( Bansal agre Nuts Overs 12. documents petitioner h his favour, bail. 13. 14. 13.11.2025 gbs -33275-2024 -10 iana (copy of which is appended alo al agreeing to make payment of Rs.7 Overseas stands recorded. Consequently, in view of the ments brought on record, the Court i ioner has failed to make out a case of avour, entitling him to the grant of this The petition being devoid of a Misc. application, if any, also .2025 Whether Speaking/reasoned Whether Reportable 10- ed along), factum of co-accused Aja f Rs.70 lakhs in account of M/s Fres of the entire facts, circumstances an ourt is further of the opinion that th ase of exceptional depravity/hardship of this extraordinary relief of pre-arre id of any merit is hereby dismissed. , also stands disposed of. (AARADHNA SAWHNEY) JUDGE : Yes/No : Yes/No ed Ajay /s Fresh ces and that the dship in arrest NEY) GURBACHAN SINGH 2025.11.18 09:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document