CRM-M- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT 105 Manash Pratim Borah State of Haryana Date of decision: Date of Uploading : 01.05.2026 CORAM: Present: SUMEET GOEL 1. seeking grant of anticipatory/pre 2023 in FIR No. under Sections District Charkhi Dadri, Haryana. 2. Ashwani Sharma, in search of employment, came into contact with co accused Devashish Vishwakarma at Vithal Bhai Patel House, has been alleged that the complainant was petitioner and other co having strong connections with government agencies and the ability to facilitate allotment of governme -21119-2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Manash Pratim Borah V/s State of Haryana Date of decision: 01.05.2026 Date of Uploading : 01.05.2026 CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Ms. Preeti, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Mahima Yashpal Singla, Senior DAG Haryana. Mr. Akash Juneja, Advocate for the complainant (through Video Conference). ***** SUMEET GOEL, J. (Oral) Present petition has been filed on behalf of the petitioner seeking grant of anticipatory/pre-arrest bail under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023 in FIR No.44 dated 06.03.2025 registered for offences punishable under Sections 406, 420 & 120-B of IPC District Charkhi Dadri, Haryana. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the complainant, namely Ashwani Sharma, in search of employment, came into contact with co accused Devashish Vishwakarma at Vithal Bhai Patel House, has been alleged that the complainant was petitioner and other co-accused persons, who represented themselves as having strong connections with government agencies and the ability to facilitate allotment of government survey work. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-21119-2026 ....Petitioner ....Respondent HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Ms. Preeti, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Mahima Yashpal Singla, Senior DAG Haryana. Mr. Akash Juneja, Advocate for the complainant . Present petition has been filed on behalf of the petitioner arrest bail under Section 482 of BNSS, registered for offences punishable B of IPC at Police Station Dadri City, The prosecution case, in brief, is that the complainant, namely Ashwani Sharma, in search of employment, came into contact with co accused Devashish Vishwakarma at Vithal Bhai Patel House, New Delhi. has been alleged that the complainant was introduced to the present accused persons, who represented themselves as having strong connections with government agencies and the ability to nt survey work. The complainant was Present petition has been filed on behalf of the petitioner arrest bail under Section 482 of BNSS, registered for offences punishable Dadri City, The prosecution case, in brief, is that the complainant, namely Ashwani Sharma, in search of employment, came into contact with co- New Delhi. It introduced to the present accused persons, who represented themselves as having strong connections with government agencies and the ability to The complainant was AJAY KUMAR 2026.05.01 16:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- induced to invest in a purported “Migrant Labour Survey” project allegedly awarded to M/s PSAR Communication Pvt. Ltd. petitioner had and that the complainant would be allotted survey work in various districts of Assam. complainant allegedly arranged and paid an amount of approximately Rs.1,04,00,000/ well as cash payments. assurances, the work did not commence as promised, and the complainant later discovered that the company said survey project. returned, while the remaining amount was accused persons. cheated of a substantial sum of money cheating, criminal breach of trust and criminal conspiracy. these allegations, the FIR in question came to be registered and investigation was set into motion. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the FIR in question. Learned counsel has further submitted instituted to exert pressure for recovery of money arising out of what is essentially petitioner was the complainant that purpose. -21119-2026 induced to invest in a purported “Migrant Labour Survey” project allegedly awarded to M/s PSAR Communication Pvt. Ltd. petitioner had close association with key persons managing the said proje and that the complainant would be allotted survey work in various districts of Assam. Acting upon such representations and assurances, the complainant allegedly arranged and paid an amount of approximately Rs.1,04,00,000/- in multiple instalments, inclu well as cash payments. It has been further alleged that despite repeated assurances, the work did not commence as promised, and the complainant later discovered that the company did not possess any valid tender for the urvey project. Upon demanding refund, only a partial amount was returned, while the remaining amount was accused persons. In this manner, the complainant is stated to have been cheated of a substantial sum of money, thereby cheating, criminal breach of trust and criminal conspiracy. these allegations, the FIR in question came to be registered and investigation was set into motion. Learned counsel for the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the FIR in question. Learned counsel has further submitted that the FIR is an abuse of the criminal process, having been instituted to exert pressure for recovery of money arising out of what is essentially a civil dispute. According to learned counsel, the role of the petitioner was limited to arranging manpower in Assam at the instance of the complainant, and an amount of Rs.24,00,000/ that purpose. It has been further contended th 2 induced to invest in a purported “Migrant Labour Survey” project allegedly awarded to M/s PSAR Communication Pvt. Ltd. It was represented that the close association with key persons managing the said proje and that the complainant would be allotted survey work in various districts Acting upon such representations and assurances, the complainant allegedly arranged and paid an amount of approximately in multiple instalments, including through bank transfers as It has been further alleged that despite repeated assurances, the work did not commence as promised, and the complainant did not possess any valid tender for the Upon demanding refund, only a partial amount was returned, while the remaining amount was allegedly misappropriated by the In this manner, the complainant is stated to have been , thereby attracting allegations of cheating, criminal breach of trust and criminal conspiracy. On the basis of these allegations, the FIR in question came to be registered and Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the FIR in question. Learned counsel has further abuse of the criminal process, having been instituted to exert pressure for recovery of money arising out of what is According to learned counsel, the role of the limited to arranging manpower in Assam at the instance of Rs.24,00,000/- was received solely for It has been further contended that the manpower was indeed induced to invest in a purported “Migrant Labour Survey” project allegedly It was represented that the close association with key persons managing the said project and that the complainant would be allotted survey work in various districts Acting upon such representations and assurances, the complainant allegedly arranged and paid an amount of approximately ding through bank transfers as It has been further alleged that despite repeated assurances, the work did not commence as promised, and the complainant did not possess any valid tender for the Upon demanding refund, only a partial amount was allegedly misappropriated by the In this manner, the complainant is stated to have been attracting allegations of On the basis of these allegations, the FIR in question came to be registered and hat the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the FIR in question. Learned counsel has further abuse of the criminal process, having been instituted to exert pressure for recovery of money arising out of what is According to learned counsel, the role of the limited to arranging manpower in Assam at the instance of was received solely for indeed AJAY KUMAR 2026.05.01 16:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- arranged through an NGO, identity cards were issued, and requisite training was conducted genuine in nature. withdrew from the project and subsequently demanded refund of the entire amount without accounting for the expenses already incurred. the petitioner has already including Rs.13,88,000/ prior proceedings, which reflects his bona fide conduct. placed reliance on the proposition that given a criminal colour Sections 406 and 420 IPC are been contended that the petitioner has earlier and that the case is primarily based on documentary evidence, which is already in possession of th counsel, the instant case has been has been further argued that the petitioner is cooperate with the investigating agency absconding or tampering with the prosecution evidence in case he is granted the concession of anticipatory bail. submissions, grant of anticipatory bail has been prayed for. 4. anticipatory bail to the petitioner by arguing that the offence committed by the petitioner is serious in nature. According to learned State counsel, the petitioner is an integral part of a larger accused persons who collectively induced the complainant to part with a -21119-2026 arranged through an NGO, identity cards were issued, and requisite training was conducted, which demonstrates that the transaction was genuine in nature. According to learned counsel, the complainant himself w from the project and subsequently demanded refund of the entire amount without accounting for the expenses already incurred. the petitioner has already refunded a substantial portion of the amount, including Rs.13,88,000/- and an additional prior proceedings, which reflects his bona fide conduct. placed reliance on the proposition that a mere breach of contract cannot be given a criminal colour, and that the essential ingredients of offences und Sections 406 and 420 IPC are not made out in the present case. been contended that the petitioner has earlier and that the case is primarily based on documentary evidence, which is already in possession of the investigating agency. counsel, the instant case has been registered without proper justification. has been further argued that the petitioner is cooperate with the investigating agency, and there is no l absconding or tampering with the prosecution evidence in case he is granted the concession of anticipatory bail. On the strength of the aforesaid submissions, grant of anticipatory bail has been prayed for. Per contra, learned State co anticipatory bail to the petitioner by arguing that the offence committed by the petitioner is serious in nature. According to learned State counsel, the petitioner is an integral part of a larger accused persons who collectively induced the complainant to part with a 3 arranged through an NGO, identity cards were issued, and requisite training , which demonstrates that the transaction was bona fide and According to learned counsel, the complainant himself w from the project and subsequently demanded refund of the entire amount without accounting for the expenses already incurred. Furthermore, refunded a substantial portion of the amount, and an additional sum of Rs.1,50,000/- during prior proceedings, which reflects his bona fide conduct. Learned counsel has a mere breach of contract cannot be , and that the essential ingredients of offences und not made out in the present case. It has also been contended that the petitioner has already joined the investigation earlier and that the case is primarily based on documentary evidence, which e investigating agency. According to learned registered without proper justification. has been further argued that the petitioner is ready and willing to fully , and there is no likelihood of his absconding or tampering with the prosecution evidence in case he is granted On the strength of the aforesaid submissions, grant of anticipatory bail has been prayed for. , learned State counsel has opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner by arguing that the offence committed by the petitioner is serious in nature. According to learned State counsel, the petitioner is an integral part of a larger controversy involving multip accused persons who collectively induced the complainant to part with a arranged through an NGO, identity cards were issued, and requisite training bona fide and According to learned counsel, the complainant himself w from the project and subsequently demanded refund of the entire Furthermore, refunded a substantial portion of the amount, during Learned counsel has a mere breach of contract cannot be , and that the essential ingredients of offences under It has also already joined the investigation earlier and that the case is primarily based on documentary evidence, which According to learned registered without proper justification. It ready and willing to fully ikelihood of his absconding or tampering with the prosecution evidence in case he is granted On the strength of the aforesaid opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner by arguing that the offence committed by the petitioner is serious in nature. According to learned State counsel, the involving multiple accused persons who collectively induced the complainant to part with a AJAY KUMAR 2026.05.01 16:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- huge amount representations regarding government tenders. It that the petitioner involved throughout the transaction. It investigation has revealed that the alleged tender itself was dubious and the representations made to the complainant were Furthermore, the effected and necessary to unearth the conspiracy, trace the flow of funds and identify the role of other co concession of pre investigation. instant petition. 5. gone through the available record of the case. 6. serious and grave allegations have been levelled against the petitioner. The material collected during the indicates receipt of money by the petitioner from the complainant. The allegations in the FIR reflect that the complainant was induced to part with a substantial amount on the pretext of securing government role attributed to the petitioner cannot, at this stage, be termed as isolated or merely ancillary. The material on record prima facie indicates that the petitioner was part of the conspiracy and remained involved even at subsequent stages -21119-2026 huge amount (i.e. exceeding Rs.1.00 representations regarding government tenders. It that the petitioner has actively participated in the inducement and remained involved throughout the transaction. It has been investigation has revealed that the alleged tender itself was dubious and the representations made to the complainant were Furthermore, the substantial recovery of cheated amount is yet to be effected and, therefore, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is necessary to unearth the conspiracy, trace the flow of funds and identify the role of other co-accused. Furthermore, in case the petitioner is granted the concession of pre-arrest bail, at this stage, it may impede the ongoing investigation. Accordingly, a prayer has been made for the instant petition. I have heard the learned cou gone through the available record of the case. As per the case put forth in the FIR in question, indubitably, serious and grave allegations have been levelled against the petitioner. The material collected during the course of inquiry and investigation prima facie indicates receipt of money by the petitioner from the complainant. The allegations in the FIR reflect that the complainant was induced to part with a substantial amount on the pretext of securing government role attributed to the petitioner cannot, at this stage, be termed as isolated or merely ancillary. The material on record prima facie indicates that the petitioner was part of the conspiracy and remained involved even at subsequent stages when further payments were demanded and collected. 4 .00 crore) on the basis of false representations regarding government tenders. It has been further contended actively participated in the inducement and remained has been further contended that the investigation has revealed that the alleged tender itself was dubious and the representations made to the complainant were prima facie false. substantial recovery of cheated amount is yet to be custodial interrogation of the petitioner is necessary to unearth the conspiracy, trace the flow of funds and identify the Furthermore, in case the petitioner is granted the arrest bail, at this stage, it may impede the ongoing Accordingly, a prayer has been made for the dismissal of the I have heard the learned counsel for the rival parties and have gone through the available record of the case. As per the case put forth in the FIR in question, indubitably, serious and grave allegations have been levelled against the petitioner. The course of inquiry and investigation prima facie indicates receipt of money by the petitioner from the complainant. The allegations in the FIR reflect that the complainant was induced to part with a substantial amount on the pretext of securing government survey work. The role attributed to the petitioner cannot, at this stage, be termed as isolated or merely ancillary. The material on record prima facie indicates that the petitioner was part of the conspiracy and remained involved even at when further payments were demanded and collected. on the basis of false has been further contended actively participated in the inducement and remained that the investigation has revealed that the alleged tender itself was dubious and the false. substantial recovery of cheated amount is yet to be custodial interrogation of the petitioner is necessary to unearth the conspiracy, trace the flow of funds and identify the Furthermore, in case the petitioner is granted the arrest bail, at this stage, it may impede the ongoing of the and have As per the case put forth in the FIR in question, indubitably, serious and grave allegations have been levelled against the petitioner. The course of inquiry and investigation prima facie indicates receipt of money by the petitioner from the complainant. The allegations in the FIR reflect that the complainant was induced to part with a survey work. The role attributed to the petitioner cannot, at this stage, be termed as isolated or merely ancillary. The material on record prima facie indicates that the petitioner was part of the conspiracy and remained involved even at when further payments were demanded and collected. AJAY KUMAR 2026.05.01 16:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- The plea of the petitioner that the dispute is purely civil in nature does not persuade this Court at this stage. In the considered opinion of this Court, the allegations are not confined to a mere breach elements of inducement and deception. The partial refund of certain amounts does not, by itself, absolve the petitioner of criminal liability at this stage, particularly when a substantial amount is still alleged to be outstanding. at a crucial stage and custodial interrogation of the petitioner may be necessary to trace the remaining amount, unearth the modus operandi and ascertain the precise role of each acc magnitude of the amount involved and the nature of allegations weigh heavily against the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 7. nature is also anticipatory bail is an extraordinary discretionary relief and is not to be granted as a matter of course, particularly in cases involving serious economic offences. While considering a petitio Court is required to strike a balance between the personal liberty of the individual and the requirement of a fair, free and effective investigation. allegations in the present case disclose a prima facie well conspiracy whereby the complainant has allegedly been defrauded of a substantial amount of money. In such circumstances, this Court does not deem it appropriate to grant anticipatory bail at this nascent stage. Grant of such relief at this stage is likely to ha -21119-2026 The plea of the petitioner that the dispute is purely civil in nature does not persuade this Court at this stage. In the considered opinion of this Court, the allegations are not confined to a mere breach elements of inducement and deception. The partial refund of certain amounts does not, by itself, absolve the petitioner of criminal liability at this stage, particularly when a substantial amount is still alleged to be nding. This Court cannot lose sight of the fact that the investigation is at a crucial stage and custodial interrogation of the petitioner may be necessary to trace the remaining amount, unearth the modus operandi and ascertain the precise role of each accused in the alleged conspiracy. The magnitude of the amount involved and the nature of allegations weigh heavily against the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. The plea of the petitioner that the matter is purely civil in nature is also not borne out from the record at this stage. It is trite law that anticipatory bail is an extraordinary discretionary relief and is not to be granted as a matter of course, particularly in cases involving serious economic offences. While considering a petitio Court is required to strike a balance between the personal liberty of the individual and the requirement of a fair, free and effective investigation. allegations in the present case disclose a prima facie well iracy whereby the complainant has allegedly been defrauded of a substantial amount of money. In such circumstances, this Court does not deem it appropriate to grant anticipatory bail at this nascent stage. Grant of such relief at this stage is likely to hamper the ongoing investigation. No 5 The plea of the petitioner that the dispute is purely civil in nature does not persuade this Court at this stage. In the considered opinion of this Court, the allegations are not confined to a mere breach of contract but also disclose elements of inducement and deception. The partial refund of certain amounts does not, by itself, absolve the petitioner of criminal liability at this stage, particularly when a substantial amount is still alleged to be This Court cannot lose sight of the fact that the investigation is at a crucial stage and custodial interrogation of the petitioner may be necessary to trace the remaining amount, unearth the modus operandi and used in the alleged conspiracy. The magnitude of the amount involved and the nature of allegations weigh heavily against the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. The plea of the petitioner that the matter is purely civil in borne out from the record at this stage. It is trite law that anticipatory bail is an extraordinary discretionary relief and is not to be granted as a matter of course, particularly in cases involving serious economic offences. While considering a petition for anticipatory bail, the Court is required to strike a balance between the personal liberty of the individual and the requirement of a fair, free and effective investigation. The allegations in the present case disclose a prima facie well-planned iracy whereby the complainant has allegedly been defrauded of a substantial amount of money. In such circumstances, this Court does not deem it appropriate to grant anticipatory bail at this nascent stage. Grant of mper the ongoing investigation. No The plea of the petitioner that the dispute is purely civil in nature does not persuade this Court at this stage. In the considered opinion of this Court, the of contract but also disclose elements of inducement and deception. The partial refund of certain amounts does not, by itself, absolve the petitioner of criminal liability at this stage, particularly when a substantial amount is still alleged to be This Court cannot lose sight of the fact that the investigation is at a crucial stage and custodial interrogation of the petitioner may be necessary to trace the remaining amount, unearth the modus operandi and used in the alleged conspiracy. The magnitude of the amount involved and the nature of allegations weigh The plea of the petitioner that the matter is purely civil in borne out from the record at this stage. It is trite law that anticipatory bail is an extraordinary discretionary relief and is not to be granted as a matter of course, particularly in cases involving serious n for anticipatory bail, the Court is required to strike a balance between the personal liberty of the The planned iracy whereby the complainant has allegedly been defrauded of a substantial amount of money. In such circumstances, this Court does not deem it appropriate to grant anticipatory bail at this nascent stage. Grant of mper the ongoing investigation. No AJAY KUMAR 2026.05.01 16:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- cause, much less any plausible cause, has been shown at this stage to indicate that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present FIR. 8. grant of anticipatory bail, the Court has to equilibrate between safeguarding individual rights and protecting societal interests. The Court ought to reckon with the magnitude and nature of the offence; the role attributed to the accused; the need for fair and impact of such alleged iniquities on the society. At this stage, there is no material on record to hold that petitioner. The material which has come on record and investigation, appear to be established a reasonable basis for the accusations. Thus, it is not appropriate to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, as it would necessarily cause impediment in effective investigation. In 1039, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held as under : (SCC p. 189, para 6) -21119-2026 cause, much less any plausible cause, has been shown at this stage to indicate that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present FIR. It is befitting to mention here that while considering a plea for t of anticipatory bail, the Court has to equilibrate between safeguarding individual rights and protecting societal interests. The Court ought to reckon with the magnitude and nature of the offence; the role attributed to the accused; the need for fair and free investigation as also the deeper and wide impact of such alleged iniquities on the society. At this stage, there is no material on record to hold that prima facie petitioner. The material which has come on record and investigation, appear to be established a reasonable basis for the accusations. Thus, it is not appropriate to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, as it would necessarily cause impediment in effective investigation. In State v. Anil Sharma, (1997) 7 SCC 187 : 1997 SCC (Cri) , the Hon'ble Supreme Court held as under : (SCC p. 189, para 6) “6. We find force in the submission of CBI that custodial interrogation is qualitatively more elicitation-oriented than questioning a suspect who is well-ensconced with a favourable order under Section 438 of the Code. In a case like this, effective interrogation of a suspected person is of tremendous advantage in disinterring many useful informations and also materials which would have been concealed interrogation would elude if the suspected person knows that he is well protected and insulated by a pre interrogated. Very often interrogation in such a condition would reduce to a mere ritual. The argument that the custodial interrogation is fraught with the danger of the person being subjected to third need not be countenanced, for, such an argument can be advanced by all accused in all criminal cases. The Court has to presume that police officers would conduct themselves in task of disintering offences would not conduct themselves as offenders. 6 cause, much less any plausible cause, has been shown at this stage to indicate that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present FIR. It is befitting to mention here that while considering a plea for t of anticipatory bail, the Court has to equilibrate between safeguarding individual rights and protecting societal interests. The Court ought to reckon with the magnitude and nature of the offence; the role attributed to the free investigation as also the deeper and wide impact of such alleged iniquities on the society. At this stage, there is no prima facie case is not made out against the petitioner. The material which has come on record and preliminary investigation, appear to be established a reasonable basis for the accusations. Thus, it is not appropriate to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, as it would necessarily cause impediment in effective ma, (1997) 7 SCC 187 : 1997 SCC (Cri) , the Hon'ble Supreme Court held as under : (SCC p. 189, para 6) “6. We find force in the submission of CBI that custodial interrogation is oriented than questioning a suspect who is ensconced with a favourable order under Section 438 of the Code. In a case like this, effective interrogation of a suspected person is of tremendous advantage in disinterring many useful informations and also materials which would have been concealed. Success in such interrogation would elude if the suspected person knows that he is well protected and insulated by a pre-arrest bail order during the time he is interrogated. Very often interrogation in such a condition would reduce to argument that the custodial interrogation is fraught with the danger of the person being subjected to third-degree methods need not be countenanced, for, such an argument can be advanced by all accused in all criminal cases. The Court has to presume that responsible police officers would conduct themselves in task of disintering offences would not conduct themselves as offenders.” cause, much less any plausible cause, has been shown at this stage to It is befitting to mention here that while considering a plea for t of anticipatory bail, the Court has to equilibrate between safeguarding individual rights and protecting societal interests. The Court ought to reckon with the magnitude and nature of the offence; the role attributed to the free investigation as also the deeper and wide impact of such alleged iniquities on the society. At this stage, there is no case is not made out against the preliminary investigation, appear to be established a reasonable basis for the accusations. Thus, it is not appropriate to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, as it would necessarily cause impediment in effective ma, (1997) 7 SCC 187 : 1997 SCC (Cri) “6. We find force in the submission of CBI that custodial interrogation is oriented than questioning a suspect who is ensconced with a favourable order under Section 438 of the Code. In a case like this, effective interrogation of a suspected person is of tremendous advantage in disinterring many useful informations and also . Success in such interrogation would elude if the suspected person knows that he is well arrest bail order during the time he is interrogated. Very often interrogation in such a condition would reduce to argument that the custodial interrogation is fraught degree methods need not be countenanced, for, such an argument can be advanced by all responsible police officers would conduct themselves in task of disintering offences AJAY KUMAR 2026.05.01 16:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- 9. alleged fraud, the stage of investigation as also interrogation considered opinion that the petitioner does not deserve the concession of anticipatory bail in the factual 10. (i) (ii) of opinion upon merits of the case/investigation. (iii) May 01, 202 Ajay -21119-2026 Considering the gravity of the offence, the magnitude of alleged fraud, the stage of investigation as also interrogation to unearth the complete modus operandi considered opinion that the petitioner does not deserve the concession of anticipatory bail in the factual milieu of the case in hand. In view of the prevenient ratiocination, it is ordained thus: The instant petition is devoid of merits and is hereby dismissed. Nothing said hereinabove shall be deemed to be an expression of opinion upon merits of the case/investigation. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed off. 2026 Whether speaking/reasoned: Whether reportable: 7 Considering the gravity of the offence, the magnitude of alleged fraud, the stage of investigation as also the necessity of custodial modus operandi, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner does not deserve the concession of of the case in hand. e prevenient ratiocination, it is ordained thus: petition is devoid of merits and is hereby dismissed. Nothing said hereinabove shall be deemed to be an expression of opinion upon merits of the case/investigation. ication(s), if any, shall also stand disposed off. (SUMEET GOEL) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No Considering the gravity of the offence, the magnitude of the necessity of custodial this Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner does not deserve the concession of petition is devoid of merits and is hereby dismissed. Nothing said hereinabove shall be deemed to be an expression AJAY KUMAR 2026.05.01 16:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document