CRM-M-33249-2026 (O&M) -:1:- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH (209) CRM-M-33249-2026 (O&M) Date of Decision:09.07.2026 KASHISH … Petitioner Versus STATE OF HARYANA ... Respondent -.- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIRINDER AGGARWAL Present:- Mr. Sanjay Verma, Advocate along with Ms. Neha, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Karan Veer Singh, Sr. DAG, Haryana. -.- VIRINDER AGGARWAL , J . (Oral) 1. The present is the first petition instituted under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding to the erstwhile Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973) seeking the concession of anticipatory bail in connection with FIR No. 0006 dated 05.01.2024, registered under Sections 406, 409, 420 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (corresponding to Sections 316, 316(5), 318(4) and 61 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023) and Section 3 of the Haryana Protection of Interest of Depositors in Financial Establishments Act, 2013, which was added subsequently, at Police Station Sector-50, Gurugram (Annexure P-2). GAURAV SOROT 2026.07.10 16:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-33249-2026 (O&M) -:2:- 2. Succinctly stated, the present FIR came to be registered on the complaint of Vijay Kumar Sharma, alleging that Rahul Tignayat, proprietor of Hindustan Energy Saver Private Ltd., along with Rajender Kumar Bansal (Account Head) and other company officials, induced the complainant and numerous investors to invest substantial amounts in various schemes launched under the names Hindustan Energy Saver Private Ltd., Hindustan Ozone Saver Company, and subsequently Ozone Urja Saver Ltd., on the promise of assured monthly cashback, electricity- saving benefits, electric scooters, and lucrative financial returns. It is alleged that the complainant invested a sum of 19,48,000/- ₹ in the said schemes and, acting upon the representations made by the company, introduced several other investors. The complaint further alleges that after mobilising investments running into approximately 400–500 crores ₹ across the country through the launch of an Initial Public Offering (IPO), the company abruptly ceased its operations, closed its online platform, and its promoters and officials absconded, thereby defrauding the investors. On the basis of the aforesaid allegations, the present FIR came to be registered against the proprietor, office bearers, and other officials of the company. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a young woman who was merely an employee of the principal accused and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is contended that the petitioner neither solicited nor induced any investor to invest in the alleged schemes and is herself a victim of the fraudulent activities of the main accused. It is further submitted that no custodial interrogation of the GAURAV SOROT 2026.07.10 16:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-33249-2026 (O&M) -:3:- petitioner is warranted. In support of the aforesaid contention, reliance has been placed upon the judgment of this Court in Harleen Kaur v. State of Punjab, Law Finder Doc. ID # 2705465, wherein anticipatory bail was granted to a young female employee of the principal accused in a case involving allegations of cheating on the pretext of sending persons abroad, notwithstanding the allegation that a part of the cheated amount had been transferred by the complainant into the account of the petitioner therein at the instance of the principal accused. 4. Per contra, learned State counsel vehemently opposes the present petition and submits that the petitioner does not deserve the extraordinary concession of anticipatory bail. It is contended that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is indispensable for unearthing the complete modus operandi adopted by the accused persons, tracing the absconding co-accused, recovering the commission earned by the petitioner as well as the proceeds of crime, identifying the role played by each conspirator, and ascertaining the money trail for recovery of the defrauded amounts. It is further submitted that the allegations pertain to large-scale economic offences involving cheating of numerous investors, which have serious ramifications on society at large and, therefore, deserve to be viewed with the utmost seriousness. Grant of anticipatory bail at this stage would not only impede the ongoing investigation but may also frustrate the efforts of the investigating agency to recover the cheated amounts and apprehend the remaining accused persons. Learned State counsel further points out that another FIR also stands registered against the petitioner, which is presently under investigation. GAURAV SOROT 2026.07.10 16:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-33249-2026 (O&M) -:4:- 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties at length and have carefully perused the paper book with their able assistance. 6. Upon a prima facie consideration of the material available on record, this Court finds no ground to exercise the extraordinary discretionary jurisdiction for grant of anticipatory bail. The petitioner has been specifically named in the FIR as a salesperson associated with Hindustan Energy Savers Pvt. Ltd. and Ozone Energy Savers Ltd. The investigation has also brought on record electronic chat communications prima facie indicating that the petitioner actively persuaded the complainant, Vijay Kumar, to invest in the impugned schemes. Furthermore, the material collected during investigation reveals that an amount of 12,40,065/- ₹ was transferred from the account of the principal accused, Rahul Sharma, to the account of the petitioner during the period from 09.08.2022 to 11.10.2023. 6.2. The role attributed to the petitioner cannot be viewed in isolation, as the material collected during the course of investigation prima facie indicates that she acted as a cog in the entire wheel of the alleged conspiracy devised to dupe a large number of innocent investors. The allegations reveal that the petitioner was not a mere bystander but an integral participant in the execution of the alleged fraudulent scheme. Grant of the extraordinary concession of anticipatory bail at this stage is likely to impede the ongoing investigation, which is still at a nascent stage. The investigation has yet to reach its logical conclusion; the co-accused are yet to be apprehended; and the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is considered imperative for unearthing the complete modus operandi GAURAV SOROT 2026.07.10 16:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-33249-2026 (O&M) -:5:- adopted by the accused persons, tracing the money trail, recovering the proceeds of crime, and ascertaining the whereabouts and precise role of the remaining conspirators. The judgment relied upon by learned counsel for the petitioner in Harleen Kaur (supra) is clearly distinguishable on facts and does not, therefore, advance the petitioner's case. Consequently, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the considered view that the petitioner has failed to satisfy the parameters warranting the grant of anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the present petition, being devoid of merit, is hereby dismissed. 7. In view of the final adjudication of the principal petition, all pending miscellaneous applications, if any, arising therefrom or ancillary thereto, shall also stand disposed of accordingly. No separate or further orders are required to be passed in that regard. ( VIRINDER AGGARWAL) 09.07.2026 JUDGE Gaurav Sorot Whether reasoned / speaking? Yes / No Whether reportable? Yes / No GAURAV SOROT 2026.07.10 16:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document