CRM-M-31788-2026 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 209 CRM-M-31788-2026 (O&M) Date of decision: 08.07.2026 Manoj Kumar Sharma ...Petitioner Versus State of Haryana ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Present:- Mr. Sanjay Saini, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Aditya Pal Singla, DAG, Haryana. Mr. Rajesh Kataria, Advocate for the complainants/victims. MANISHA BATRA, J. (Oral) 1. The present petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) seeking grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case arising out of FIR No. 360 dated 20.11.2025 registered under Sections 316(2) and 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 at Police Station Mahesh Nagar, District Ambala. 2. As per the allegations in the FIR, the petitioner was working as a property broker/agent associated with the Sushma Group and had developed close acquaintance with the complainants and their families. It is alleged that after the demise of the husbands of the complainants, who had received substantial terminal benefits including provident fund, gratuity, LIC proceeds MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2026.07.09 09:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-31788-2026 (O&M) -2- and other retiral dues, the petitioner induced them to invest their money in commercial units of Sushma Imperial and Sushma Metropol projects but instead of depositing the amounts with the builder, the petitioner dishonestly diverted substantial amounts of money into his own bank account and other personal investments. It is further alleged that the complainants transferred huge amounts by way of cash, cheques and electronic transfers on the representation of the petitioner that the same would be utilized towards payment of instalments of the projects. Upon receiving demand notices from the builder, the complainants discovered that the amounts had not been deposited. Thereafter, despite admitting his liability during inquiry and executing a compromise assuring repayment and completion of the formalities, the petitioner allegedly failed to honour the commitment, leading to registration of the present FIR for the offences of cheating and criminal breach of trust. Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner moved an application for grant of anticipatory bail, which has been dismissed by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ambala, vide order dated 21.05.2026. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that he has been falsely implicated in the present case. He was merely acting as a broker facilitating allotment of plots/commercial units and had no independent role in the alleged transactions except introducing the complainants to the project. The actual dispute, if any, is with the builder and its officials and the petitioner has unnecessarily been made a scapegoat. It is further argued that whatever amount was received from the complainants had been deposited with the Sushma Group towards the project and there is no allegation that the petitioner MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2026.07.09 09:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-31788-2026 (O&M) -3- misappropriated or retained any amount for his own benefit. Learned counsel submits that the essential ingredients of the offences alleged are not attracted. No recovery is to be effected from the petitioner. His custodial interrogation is not required. He is ready to join the investigation. His detention would not serve any useful purpose. Hence, it is urged that the petition deserves to be allowed. 4. Status report has been filed. Learned State counsel, assisted by learned counsel for the complainants/victims, has argued that the allegations against the petitioner are quite serious. He has duped the complainants/victims in a well-planned manner whereby he exploited the vulnerable condition of the complainants after the demise of their husbands and dishonestly induced them to part with substantial amounts running into crores of rupees. The investigation has revealed that instead of depositing the money with the builder, substantial amounts were transferred to the petitioner's personal bank account and to the account of his associate. The bank statements, transaction details and documentary evidence collected during investigation substantiate the allegations levelled in the FIR. The custodial interrogation of the petitioner is essential for recovery of the cheated amount and tracing the flow of funds as well as for confronting him with documentary evidence and unearthing the complete conspiracy. Therefore, it is prayed that the petition be dismissed. 5. This Court has heard the rival submissions. 6. The allegations levelled against the petitioner are serious in nature involving cheating and criminal breach of trust of substantial amounts allegedly obtained from the complainants by taking advantage of their MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2026.07.09 09:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-31788-2026 (O&M) -4- vulnerable circumstances. The material collected during investigation, as reflected in the status report, prima facie indicates transfer of significant amounts into the petitioner's personal account and other related accounts. The investigation is still at a crucial stage. The allegations prima facie make out a case for commission of alleged offences against the petitioner. His custodial interrogation is required for conducting thorough and proper investigation in the matter. In case his custodial interrogation is denied to the investigating agency, the same will leave many glaring loopholes and gaps adversely affecting the investigation. The powers under Section 482 of BNSS are extraordinary and the same are to be exercised sparingly in exceptional circumstances. The judicial discretion conferred upon the Court has to be properly exercised after application of mind as to the nature and gravity of the accusation, possibility of applicant fleeing from justice and other factors to decide whether it is a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail as such grant to some extent interferes in the sphere of investigation of an offence. The Court has also to see that an order of anticipatory bail should not operate as inroad in the normal legal procedure of criminal cases by the trial Court. The custodial interrogation of a suspected person is qualitatively more elicitation oriented than questioning a suspect who is well ensconced with a favourable order under Section 482 of BNSS. The Court must be circumspect while exercising such power for grant of anticipatory bail and it should not be granted as a matter of rule and has to be granted only when the Court is convinced that exceptional circumstances exist to resort to that extra ordinary remedy. In the present case, no such exceptional circumstances warranting exercise of the MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2026.07.09 09:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-31788-2026 (O&M) -5- powers for grant of anticipatory bail by this Court are existing. As such, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petition does not deserve to be allowed. Accordingly, the same is dismissed. 7. It is made clear that the observations made hereinabove are only for the purpose of deciding the present petition and the same shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. 08.07.2026 (MANISHA BATRA) Waseem R. Ansari Waseem R. Ansari Waseem R. Ansari Waseem R. Ansari JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2026.07.09 09:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document