CRM-M-35475-2026 - 1- 109 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-35475-2026 Date of Decision: 06.07.2026 Suraj Kumar …Petitioner vs. State of Haryana …Respondent Coram : Hon’ble Mr. Justice N.S.Shekhawat Present : Mr. Amardeep Singh Sheoran, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Rajinder Kumar Banku, Sr. DAG, Haryana. Mr. Mayank Aggarwal, Advocate, for the complainant. *** N.S.Shekhawat J. (Oral) 1. The petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 with a prayer to grant anticipatory bail to him in case FIR No.149 dated 27.05.2026, registered under Sections 316(2) and 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (Sections 406 and 420 of I.P.C.), at Police Station Civil Lines, Bhiwani (Annexure P/1). 2. The FIR in the present case was registered on the basis of the statement made by Vikas Mittal and the same has been reproduced below:- “The complaint received from the family number 83-PG dated 16.03.2026 and subsequent investigation by the District Investigation Branch (5), Police Lines Bhiwani and the office of the Superintendent of Police Bhiwani, has been received by Police Station Civil Lines Bhiwani, the gist of which is as follows HEMLATA 2026.07.15 17:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-35475-2026 - 2- To the Superintendent of Police, Bhiwani, Subject: Regarding misappropriation of money and cheating in the name of showing plots. Sir, with due respect I am Vikas Mittal, son of Shri Mani Ram Mittal, resident of Naya Bazar, Bhiwani. I have a shop in the name of Mittal Travels at Sarai Chhoppata, Bhiwani. Suraj, son of Baljit Singh, resident of village Prem Nagar, presently Sector 13 Bhiwani, mobile no. 9813136777, along with his wife, has been purchasing jewelry goods from my shop for the last 10-15 years. In July 2024, Suraj and his wife came to my shop and stated that they have a 600 sq. yard ancestral plot in village Prem Nagar, located on the Bhiwani-Hisar Highway, on the T-side, open. Furthermore, they claimed that two plots of 1200-1200 sq. yards adjacent to this plot belong to their own family, which were purchased by Shri Jagbir Maan, village Talu, presently Sector-13 Bhiwani, mobile no. 9416160773. Suraj's wife then said that you and I can buy these plots from Shri Jagbir Maan by sharing the cost equally. When I expressed my hesitation. Suraj said that you need not worry. We will pay Rs. 50-60 Lakhs for the sale and share it equally. I will take a registered sale deed from Shri Jagbir Maan for one year, and within this time, our entire plot on the T-side will become open, allowing us to sell it directly and make a good profit. Trusting them, on 25.07.2024, I gave Rs. 2 Lakhs from my home to Suraj for the cost of the aforementioned plot and to finalize the time and price. Suraj came and informed me that an agreement had been reached with Guruji for Rs. 14,200/- per sq. yard and registration of the sale deed within 6 months. After 15-20 days, Rs. 60 Lakhs were to be paid, after which this period would commence. Thereafter, I took Rs. 25 Lakhs from ICICI Bank on loan for my share and gave it to Suraj in cash from Kotak Bank on 17.08.2024. After that, on 06.09.2024, I gave Rs. 4 Lakhs to Suraj to get the sale deed made from Guruji. The next day, Suraj informed me that he was unable to bring his share of the money and that I would have to arrange for his money as well, but there was no hurry. He said, he would sell the plot before that. He HEMLATA 2026.07.15 17:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-35475-2026 - 3- mentioned that he was in talks with buyers. Seeing my money getting stuck, I arranged for Suraj's share of the money as well. On 18.09.2024, I paid Rs.5 Lakhs and Rs. 7.40 Lakhs to Pritpal Jatuhari for the registration of the land, of which a significant amount was paid online. On 14.10.2024 Rs.6 Lakhs were transferred to Suraj's account via RTGS. On 19.10.2024, Rs. 3 Lakhs were given through the bank account and Rs. 1 Lakh in cash to Suraj on 23.10.2024. In this manner, by 11.12.2024, I had paid Suraj Rs. 53 Lakhs 40 Thousand. After this, I told Suraj that it has been about 4 months, and you have neither shown me the sale deed nor returned my share of the money. Therefore, please get my money back from Guruji. I do not want any profit from you then he said that there is concess have made with his friend for taking Rs. 30 Lakhs as loan by giving the same amount I will get written the sale deed from the GuruJi and get the time limitation extended. Thereafter on 21.02.2025 I called Suraj that there are only 2-3 days left for completion of time period of six months and if Guruji is not returning the money then you will return the money, then on 22.03.2025 Suraj called me at a sweet shop near ghantaghar post office and said that I have got written the sale deed from Guruji by paying Rs. 30 lakhs and you don't worry about the money and when I asked for the sale deed then he said that the same has been kept with the person from whom he has taken the loan of Rs.30 lakhs. I will give you in 3-4 days and thereafter when I called him he always made the excuse and when last time I called him then he said that if you have asked for the money with interest then what will you do of the sale deed. Then he gave the time of 01.04.2025 said that he will return the amount of about Rs 53 lakh and 40 thousand along with the interest will pay about 56 Lakhs on 01.04.2025. There after I tried to get my money by various means and till 14.03.2026 I have no contact with the Suraj. So, Suraj and his wife along with other persons have committed fraud with me, so, it is requested to you sir that the legal action be taken against them and justice may be given. SD/- Vikas Mittal.” HEMLATA 2026.07.15 17:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-35475-2026 - 4- 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently argued that the complainant had only handed over a sum of Rs.10 lacs to the petitioner and no other amount was paid by him. Even there was no writing of any agreement between the complainant and the petitioner and all the allegations leveled by the complainant are apparently false. He further submits that there was only a financial dispute between the parties and a civil dispute has been wrongly converted in a criminal offence by the police. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel assisted by learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner on the ground that during the course of investigation, sufficient incriminating evidence has been collected against the petitioner, which shows that the present petitioner had cheated the complainant to the tune of Rs.53.40 lacs, by playing a fraud on him. During the course of investigation, the police has collected the transactions details of account No.0147129602 and it has been found that an amount of Rs.10 lacs has been taken by the complainant through various bank transactions and the remaining amount was taken in cash by the complainant from time to time. The conversation between the complainant and the petitioner was also recorded in a pen drive, which also proves that the petitioner had committed a fraud of Rs.53.40 lacs in the present case. Consequently, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner would be required not only in view of the gravity of the matter but also to unmask the modus operandi, other persons involved in the crime and the documentary evidence in the present case. HEMLATA 2026.07.15 17:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-35475-2026 - 5- 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record carefully with their able assistance. 6. In the present case, the complainant has leveled serious allegations of committing fraud by the present petitioner and his wife Kavita on the pretext of arranging a plot in the name of the complainant. By playing a fraud on him, they had cheated him to the tune of Rs.53.40 lacs and a part of the amount was transferred in the bank accounts of the petitioner. The petitioner is the main accused and in the considered opinion of the Court, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner would be required, in view of the submissions made by learned State counsel. 7. Thus finding no merits, the present petition is ordered to be dismissed. (N.S.SHEKHAWAT) 06.07.2026 JUDGE hemlata Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No HEMLATA 2026.07.15 17:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document