CRM-M No.34624 of 2026 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 211 CRM-M No.34624 of 2026 Date of decision: 10.07.2026 Ruvi Devi ... Petitioner Vs. State of Haryana ... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Present:- Mr. Virender Verma, Advocate, for the petitioner (through Video Conferencing). Mr. Neeraj Poswal, AAG, Haryana, for the respondent-State. ---- MANISHA BATRA, J. (Oral) 1. The instant one is the second petition as filed by the petitioner under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of anticipatory bail in case arising out of FIR No.499 dated 28.08.2024 registered under Sections 384, 406, 420, 467, 468, 471, 201 and 120-B of IPC at Police Station Saran, District Faridabad. The previous petition as filed by her bearing CRM-M-27324- 2026 had been dismissed as withdrawn as on 14.05.2026. 2. As per the allegations, Arun Verma, son of the complainant MANJU 2026.07.10 15:33 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order /judgment Chandigarh CRM-M No.34624 of 2026 -2- Inder Pal Verma had a matrimonial dispute with his wife. An FIR was registered against him. Subsequently, the said matrimonial dispute was amicably settled and marriage between her son and his wife was dissolved by a decree of divorce passed on 31.03.2018. The accused Roop Singh was working as a munshi/clerk of the advocate who was engaged by the complainant and his family during the course of the abovementioned matrimonial litigation. Even after conclusion of the said litigation, accused Roop Singh had continued visiting the complainant and his family members and gradually gained their confidence. He represented to them that he had become a practising advocate after completing his law degree. 3. As per the further allegations, the accused Roop Singh visited the jewellery shop of the complainant as on 04.09.2018 and represented to him that former wife of his son had initiated some litigation before this Court with regard to the previous matrimonial dispute and also told him that if immediate legal action was not taken, the complainant and his family members would be sent to jail. He assured the complainant to get some senior advocate engaged in this Court for the purpose of defending his family members and himself. He also allured the complainant to institute proceedings for recovery of compensation from his daughter-in- law and her family members and on that pretext, he secured the signatures of the complainant and his family members on several blank MANJU 2026.07.10 15:33 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order /judgment Chandigarh CRM-M No.34624 of 2026 -3- or typed papers as well as Vakalatnama. Being unaware about the technicalities of law and while reposing faith on the accused Roop Singh, the complainant and his family members had signed such papers. However, even subsequently, the accused Roop Singh kept on telling that they would entangled in other litigations and also that he had engaged counsel and had moved petition for grant of compensation in their favour and further that an order had been passed by this Court granting compensation to the tune of Rs.35 lakhs in favour of the complainant and then by inducing that much more compensation could be given to them, he extracted money from the complainant and his family. 4. As per the further allegations, accused Roop Singh further represented that the Hon’ble Supreme Court had enhanced the compensation amount of Rs.5 crores in favour of the complainant and again extracted money from the complainant. The signatures and finger prints of son of the complainant were taken and several blank papers and stamp papers etc. were got signed by the complainant even subsequently also and in this manner, an amount of Rs.40 lakhs was extracted from the complainant/his family members by the above named accused Roop Singh. Whenever the complainant asked about the amount of compensation, the accused Roop Singh made one or the other excuse and he kept on extracting different amounts of money from 2021 to 2023 also and an amount of approximately Rs.2,53,26,850/- was extracted by Roop MANJU 2026.07.10 15:33 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order /judgment Chandigarh CRM-M No.34624 of 2026 -4- Singh from the complainant under the guise of pursuing fictitious judicial proceedings. The accused Roop also instilled fear in the mind of the complainant and his family members. Ultimately, when he did not give any satisfactory reply about the fate of the litigations initiated by the complainant, the accused Roop Singh started avoiding him and even stopped taking his telephone calls, on suspicion having been arisen, the complainant made inquiries and came to know that the representations as made by the accused Roop Singh were totally false and he had cheated him by duping him of huge amount of money and by showing false and fabricated documents of judicial proceedings to him. As such, he prayed for taking action in the matter. 5. After registration of FIR, investigation proceedings were initiated. It was revealed that the complainant had made payment of money to the accused Roop Singh not only in cash but also through banking channels. On checking the account statements, it was revealed that the money deposited by the complainant had been transferred by accused Roop Singh in different bank accounts maintained by himself and his accomplices, one of whom was the present petitioner and the co- accused Gudia Devi, Rakhi Devi, Abhishek and Surender Kumar. The accused Roop Singh was arrested. He suffered disclosure statement on interrogation admitting his involvement in the crime and about transfer of substantial portion of the cheated amount into bank account of Gudia MANJU 2026.07.10 15:33 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order /judgment Chandigarh CRM-M No.34624 of 2026 -5- Devi, Rakhi Devi, Abhishek and Surender Kumar. Accused Gudia Devi was arrested on 27.12.2025. She disclosed that at the instance of accused Rakhi Devi, she had permitted credit of an amount of Rs.30 lakhs into her bank account which were transferred on the instructions of accused Roop Singh. Accused Rakhi Devi was arrested on 01.03.2026 and she too admitted that an amount of Rs.20 lakhs was credited into her bank account and was transferred at the instance of accused Roop Singh. 6. In their statements so suffered, accused Gudia Devi, sister of the present petitioner and accused Rakhi Devi, wife of nephew of the petitioner also disclosed that it was on the asking of the present petitioner that they had allowed transfer of money in their respective bank accounts from the account of the accused Roop Singh. The petitioner was nominated as such. Apprehending her arrest, she moved an application for grant of anticipatory bail which has been dismissed by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Faridabad vide order dated 15.06.2026. 7. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that she has been falsely implicated in this case. She was not named in the FIR by the complainant. There is no allegation that she had induced the complainant in any manner whatsoever or extorted any money from him; Investigation qua the co-accused stands concluded. The case is based on documentary evidence. There is no oral or documentary evidence against her. The MANJU 2026.07.10 15:33 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order /judgment Chandigarh CRM-M No.34624 of 2026 -6- disclosure statement suffered by the co-accused involving her in the crime cannot be considered to be admissible in evidence. She is ready to join the investigation. Her custodial interrogation is not required. No recovery is to be effected from her. It is, therefore, argued that the petition deserves to be allowed. 8. Per contra, learned State counsel while relying upon the status report has vehemently argued that taking into consideration the gravity of the allegations as levelled against the petitioner, she does not deserve to be extended benefit of pre arrest bail. It is also argued that there is no exceptional or extraordinary circumstance to extend benefit of pre arrest bail to the petitioner and also that her custodial interrogation is must for thorough investigation. 9. This Court has considered the rival submissions. 10. The petitioner in connivance with the co-accused Roop Singh is alleged to have joined the co-accused Rakhi Devi and Gudia Devi as well as some other co-accused and it was on her asking that money received by the accused Roop Singh from the complainant had been transferred into different bank accounts including the bank accounts of relatives of the present petitioner i.e. co-accused Rakhi Devi, Gudia Devi and others. For the purpose of eliciting information as to the manner in which the subject offences were committed as well as for the purpose of conducting proper and thorough investigation in the matter, the custodial MANJU 2026.07.10 15:33 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order /judgment Chandigarh CRM-M No.34624 of 2026 -7- interrogation of the petitioner is must. The powers of anticipatory bail are extra ordinary and the same are to be exercised sparingly in exceptional circumstances. The Court has also to see that an order of anticipatory bail should not operate as an inroad in the normal legal procedure of criminal cases by the trial Court. In the present case, no such exceptional circumstances warranting exercise of the powers for grant of anticipatory bail by this Court are existing. Keeping in view the gravity thereof, the role attributed to the petitioner, the likelihood of his influencing the course of investigation and also of tampering with the evidence, no ground has been made out for allowing the petition. As such, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petition does not deserve to be allowed. Accordingly, the same is dismissed. 11. It is, however, clarified that observations made hereinabove shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. (MANISHA BATRA) 10.07.2026 JUDGE manju Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No MANJU 2026.07.10 15:33 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order /judgment Chandigarh