IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 109 CRM-M-29977-2025 Date of decision: 28.05.2025 Subhash .....Petitioner Versus State of Haryana .....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL Present : Mr. Yogesh Jangra, Advocate for the petitioner. **** MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J. 1. The petitioner is seeking the concession of anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in case FIR No.840 dated 10.10.2024 under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, registered at Police Station Sadar, Hisar. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the FIR has been lodged after an inordinate and unexplained delay of approximately 20 months from the date of the alleged incident. Such delay, it is argued, casts a serious doubt on the genuineness of the complaint and adversely affects the credibility of the case of the prosecution. It is further submitted that there is no evidence of any monetary transaction between the complainant and the petitioner, inasmuch as no amount has been credited to the bank account of the petitioner. Learned counsel has also asserted that the role of the petitioner is confined to having introduced the complainant to the co- VINAY 2025.05.28 18:41 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment CRM-M-29977-2025 accused, namely Ravinder Singh, and that there is no material to indicate the involvement of the petitioner in the subsequent acts of cheating or forgery, including the issuance of a fake or fabricated appointment letter. 3. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the relevant material on record. 4. Upon a bare perusal of the contents of the FIR annexed as Annexure P-2 and the supporting documents, it emerges that there are prima facie allegations against the petitioner to the effect that he actively induced the complainant to part with the sum of Rs.9,20,000/- under the false assurance of procuring a government job. It is further alleged that, in furtherance of the said inducement, the petitioner was directly involved in the issuance of a forged and fabricated appointment letter, as well as the dissemination of fraudulent e-mails purporting to originate from an official source. These actions, taken together, suggest a concerted and premeditated effort to deceive the complainant and extract money under false pretences. 5. The allegations as they stand do not support the assertion of the petitioner of his limited or peripheral role. On the contrary, the material on record prima facie indicates his active participation in the commission of the alleged offence. 6. In view of the nature and gravity of the allegations and the apparent involvement of the petitioner in a well orchestrated act of cheating and forgery, no ground is made out to extend the extraordinary concession of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. The instant petition VINAY 2025.05.28 18:41 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment CRM-M-29977-2025 stands dismissed accordingly. 7. However, it is made clear that anything observed hereinabove shall not be construed to be an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. 28.05.2025 (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) Vinay JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No VINAY 2025.05.28 18:41 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment