CRM-M-11223- IN THE H (213+105) SAKET KUMAR STATE OF HAR CORAM: HON Present: Mr. J Mr. N Mr. A *** MANISHA BATR CRM-21115-2026 1. Appli exceptions and th placed on record a CRM-M-11223- 1. The i under Section 48 “BNSS”) seeking 01.06.2024 registe Section 13 of the G first petition filed dated 08.10.2025. -2026 (O&M) 1 THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB A CHANDIGARH CRM Dat MAR Versus HARYANA HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANIS Mr. J.S. Pannu, Advocate for the petit Mr. Neeraj Poswal, AAG, Haryana Mr. Aditya Sanghi, Advocate for the *** BATRA, J. (ORAL) 2026 Application for placing on record i and the document annexed with the cord as Annexure P11. -2026 The instant one is the second petitio on 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Surak eking grant of regular bail in case ari registered under Sections 408, 420, 46 f the Gambling Act at Police Station C filed by the petitioner had been dism .2025. JAB AND HARYANA AT ARH CRM-M-11223-2026 (O&M) Date of decision : 14.05.2026 ... Petitioner ...Respondent ANISHA BATRA e petitioner or the complainant cord is allowed subject to all just th the application is ordered to be petition preferred by the petitioner Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ase arising out of FIR No.248 dated 20, 467, 468, 471, 120B of IPC and ation Civil Lines, District Sirsa. The n dismissed as withdrawn vide order just o be ioner short ated and The order AMIT SHARMA 2026.05.15 13:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-11223- 2. The a complaint submitt Pro Tech. Private engaged in the b therein that the pre from the last abou as well as the Dir petitioner. The C Branch, Sirsa. Pr HDFC Banks. Th through his Lapto Directors of the members of the co the petitioner when 3. The c dealings with sev place with them w complainant asked firm at Delhi. Th on his phone for t took leave and had the petitioner reaso he disclosed that h Om Stainless Indi -2026 (O&M) 2 The aforementioned FIR was registe ubmitted by the complainant Sanjeev Private Limited Company (for short the business of manufacturing of r the present petitioner was working as t about 15 years. He was looking afte he Directors and their family member The Company was having an account sa. Previously, it was having bank s. The petitioner used to operate the b Laptop and use to ask for OTPs fro he Company whenever required. the complainant and himself used to r whenever he asked as they had blind The complainant further alleged th th several other companies and trans hem which was also done through the t asked the petitioner to transfer an a The petitioner asked the complaina e for the above said amount which w nd had gone to Goa. Having some sus r reason for having generated two OTP that he had transferred an amount of ss India Company and another in the registered on the basis of a written njeev Gupta, Director of HSF Food short “the Company”) which was g of rice mill machinery, alleging ing as an Accountant in the company g after the accounts of the Company embers who had full trust upon the ccount at ICICI Bank, Grain Market bank accounts at Canara Bank and te the bank accounts of the Company Ps from the family members of the quired. Trusting him, the family sed to divulge the details of OTPs to blind faith upon him. ed that the Company was having transaction of money used to take the petitioner. On 23.05.2024, the r an amount of Rs.40 lakhs to one plainant to give two OTPs received ich was so given, and thereafter, he me suspicion, the complainant asked o OTPs for one transaction and then unt of Rs.10 lakhs in the account of in the account of the firm which the ritten Food was ging pany pany n the arket and pany f the mily Ps to ving take , the one ived r, he sked then nt of h the AMIT SHARMA 2026.05.15 13:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-11223- complainant had t suspicion, when th the Company, he c Rs.33 Crores from members of the c preparing false an revealed that he h members and him members, relatives As such, he prayed 4. After The petitioner w disclosure stateme one Laptop, one m indulged in online used the money b Other persons invo been arrested. Inv 5. It is a falsely implicated chances of conclu been examined so suffering from can ground to him to -2026 (O&M) 3 t had told him to do. He also gave vag hen the complainant checked the bank y, he came to know that the petitione s from the bank accounts of the Co f the complainant and himself by ta alse and forged bank statements and t he had been transferring money from d himself as well as company to the latives and other accomplices, thereby prayed for taking action in the matter. After registration of FIR, investigatio ner was arrested on 15.06.2024. O tatements admitting his involvement i , one mobile phone, sum of Rs.16,00 online gambling on the site 10 CRIC oney belonging to the complainant a ns involved with him were also named d. Investigation now stands concluded It is argued by learned counsel for t icated in this case. He is in custody si conclusion of trial in the near future ned so far and even charges have not m cancer. Each day spent by him in im to seek concession of bail. The s ave vague replies and on the basis of e bank records of the ledger book of titioner had embezzled an amount of the Company as well as the family by tampering with the record, by ts and ledger books. It was also ey from bank accounts of his family to the bank accounts of his family thereby causing huge loss of money. atter. stigation proceedings were initiated. 24. On interrogation, he suffered ment in the crime and got recovered .16,000/- and disclosed that he was CRICBET and FAIRBET and had inant and his Company for betting. named as additional accused and had cluded. l for the petitioner that he has been tody since 14.06.2024. There are no uture as no prosecution witness has ve not been framed. His mother is him in custody has furnished a fresh The subject offences are triable by is of ok of nt of mily , by also mily mily ney. ated. fered ered was had . had been re no s has er is fresh le by AMIT SHARMA 2026.05.15 13:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-11223- Magistrate. His f therefore, argued t 6. Per co complainant while petition being suc petitioner are quit economic offence 467 of IPC attrac petitioner’s tampe if extended benef deserve to be allow 7. This C for the parties at co 8. The p committed offenc complainant in him accounts of the C manipulation of re form of bank stat nature. It is well relief to be grante case and there can application for gra of punishment if -2026 (O&M) 4 His further incarceration will not se gued that the petition deserves to be al Per contra, learned State counsel assi t while relying upon the status repor ng successive one is not maintainable re quite serious and grave in nature. ffence of great magnitude. The offe attracts punishment of life imprison tampering the evidence, absconding o benefit of bail. It is, therefore, argu e allowed. This Court has heard the rival submis es at considerable length. The petitioner in connivance with the offences of serious nature by not on t in him but also embezzling a huge am the Company, the complainant and h n of record and by preparing forged an k statements etc. The allegations a s well settled proposition of law that g granted or denied based on specific fa ere cannot be any exhaustive paramet for grant of bail. The factors such as ent if the accusations entail, convicti not serve any useful purpose. It is, o be allowed. el assisted by learned counsel for the report has argued that the present ainable. The allegations against the ature. He is accused of committing e offence punishable under Section risonment. There are chances of ding or committing similar offences, e, argued that the petition does not missions made by learned counsel ith the co-accused is alleged to have not only misusing the trust of the uge amount of money from the bank and his family members by way of rged and fabricated documents in the ions against him are quite grave in that grant of bail is a discretionary ific facts and circumstances of each arameter set out for considering the ch as nature of accusations, severity nviction and nature of evidence in It is, r the esent t the itting ction es of nces, s not unsel have f the bank y of n the e in nary each e erity ce in AMIT SHARMA 2026.05.15 13:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-11223- support of the accu tampering with e weighed. Frivolit element of genuin The petitioner has needs to take car principles and th compelling ground 9. It is, be construed as an and shall not influ 10. Since any, is rendered in 14.05.2026 Amit Sharma -2026 (O&M) 5 he accusations are to be seen. That ap ith evidence or threatening the ma rivolity of prosecution should also be genuineness that has to be considered er has submitted that his mother is ke care of her. However, keeping nd the circumstances as discussed ground to allow the petition. Accordin It is, however, clarified that the obse d as an expression of opinion of this C t influence the outcome of the trial in a Since the main petition has been dism ered infructuous. (MA Whether speaking/reasoned: Whether reportable:- Yes/No hat apart reasonable apprehension of he material witnesses is also to be lso be considered and it is only the idered in the matter of grant of bail. er is suffering from cancer and he eping in view the foregoing legal ussed above, this Court finds no cordingly, the same is dismissed. e observations made above shall not this Court on the merits of the case ial in any manner.
dismissed, pending application, if (MANISHA BATRA) JUDGE oned:- Yes/No es/No on of o be y the bail. d he legal s no l not case n, if AMIT SHARMA 2026.05.15 13:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.