CRM-M- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT 105 Jindal and another State of Haryana Date of decision: Date of Uploading : 26.08.2026 CORAM: Present: SUMEET GOEL 1. Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter to be referred as ‘the BNSS’) for grant of No.13 dated Sections 420, 4 & 13(2) of PC Act 2. had joined duties as the strength of competent authorities. The original complaint was made by the Sub Divisional Officer, DHBVN, Sub Urban Hansi, after it was noticed that transfer orders submitted by Amit Kuma which they joined as Engineer, DHBVN, Hisar. During the inquiry, it surfaced that the forged -40668-2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Jindal and another V/s State of Haryana Date of decision: 26.08.2026 Date of Uploading : 26.08.2026 CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Mr. Rahul Verma, Advocate for the petitioners. Ms. Mahima Yashpal Singla, Senior DAG Haryana. ***** SUMEET GOEL, J. (Oral) Present petition has been filed Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter to be referred as ‘the BNSS’) for grant of pre-arrest/anticipatory bail to the petitioner dated 11.01.2023, registered for the offences punishable under 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B IPC & 13(2) of PC Act, at Police Station Hansi City, Hansi, District Hansi. The gravamen of the prosecution case is that certain persons had joined duties as Assistant Linemen (ALM) the strength of fake/forged transfer orders purportedly issued by the competent authorities. The original complaint was made by the Sub Divisional Officer, DHBVN, Sub Urban Hansi, after it was noticed that transfer orders submitted by Amit Kumar and Sumit Kumar, on the basis of which they joined as ALM, had not been issued by the office of the Chief Engineer, DHBVN, Hisar. During the inquiry, it surfaced that the forged 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-40668-2026 ....Petitioners ....Respondent HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Rahul Verma, Advocate for the petitioners. Ms. Mahima Yashpal Singla, Senior DAG Haryana. Present petition has been filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter to be referred as ‘the BNSS’) bail to the petitioners in case bearing FIR , registered for the offences punishable under B IPC and under Sections 7, 13(1)(A) Hansi City, Hansi, District Hansi. The gravamen of the prosecution case is that certain persons ALM) (out-source) in DHBVN on forged transfer orders purportedly issued by the competent authorities. The original complaint was made by the Sub Divisional Officer, DHBVN, Sub Urban Hansi, after it was noticed that r and Sumit Kumar, on the basis of , had not been issued by the office of the Chief Engineer, DHBVN, Hisar. During the inquiry, it surfaced that the forged 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter to be referred as ‘the BNSS’) in case bearing FIR , registered for the offences punishable under )(A) The gravamen of the prosecution case is that certain persons in DHBVN on forged transfer orders purportedly issued by the competent authorities. The original complaint was made by the Sub Divisional Officer, DHBVN, Sub Urban Hansi, after it was noticed that r and Sumit Kumar, on the basis of , had not been issued by the office of the Chief Engineer, DHBVN, Hisar. During the inquiry, it surfaced that the forged AJAY KUMAR 2026.08.26 18:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- orders were sent to the concerned office through the official e the beneficiaries had allegedly joined the department in connivance with Munish Kumar, who was working as a Data Entry Operator. The investigation further revealed that several other persons had also allegedly obtained appointments through similar forged matter is not confined to one or two forged documents. As per the prosecution, several persons fabricated transfer orders r and withdrawal of amounts from the Government treasury. The investigation further disclosed that as many as been joined on different posts on the basis of such forged transfer orders. The prosecution has, therefore, involving private beneficiaries as well as persons having access to the official records and functioning of DHBVN. 3. petitioner question. named in the original FIR of investigation. It against the petitioner of co-accused Munish Kumar which and cannot be treated as substantive evidence. emphasized attribute any specific overt act to the petitioner ingredients of the offences alleged. -40668-2026 orders were sent to the concerned office through the official e the beneficiaries had allegedly joined the department in connivance with Munish Kumar, who was working as a Data Entry Operator. The investigation further revealed that several other persons had also allegedly obtained appointments through similar forged The material collected during investigation indicates that the matter is not confined to one or two forged documents. As per the prosecution, several persons allegedly got appointed on different posts using fabricated transfer orders resulting in wrongful entry into the department and withdrawal of amounts from the Government treasury. The investigation further disclosed that as many as been joined on different posts on the basis of such forged transfer orders. The prosecution has, therefore, expected the matter involving private beneficiaries as well as persons having access to the official records and functioning of DHBVN. Learned counsel for the petitioner petitioners are innocent and have been falsely implicated into the FIR in Learned counsel has further iterated that named in the original FIR and their names surfaced only during investigation. It has been further contended the petitioners is substantially based upon the disclosure statement accused Munish Kumar which, by itself and cannot be treated as substantive evidence. emphasized that the allegations in the FIR are vague, omnibus and do not attribute any specific overt act to the petitioner ingredients of the offences alleged. It has been further contended that the 2 orders were sent to the concerned office through the official e-mail and tha the beneficiaries had allegedly joined the department in connivance with Munish Kumar, who was working as a Data Entry Operator. The investigation further revealed that several other persons had also allegedly obtained appointments through similar forged transfer orders. The material collected during investigation indicates that the matter is not confined to one or two forged documents. As per the llegedly got appointed on different posts using esulting in wrongful entry into the department and withdrawal of amounts from the Government treasury. The investigation further disclosed that as many as 14 persons had allegedly been joined on different posts on the basis of such forged transfer orders. the matter to be a larger conspiracy involving private beneficiaries as well as persons having access to the official records and functioning of DHBVN. Learned counsel for the petitioners has iterated that th been falsely implicated into the FIR in Learned counsel has further iterated that petitioner(s) were not their names surfaced only during the course contended that the prosecution case is substantially based upon the disclosure statement by itself, is inadmissible in evidence and cannot be treated as substantive evidence. Learned counsel has that the allegations in the FIR are vague, omnibus and do not attribute any specific overt act to the petitioners so as to attract the It has been further contended that the mail and that the beneficiaries had allegedly joined the department in connivance with Munish Kumar, who was working as a Data Entry Operator. The investigation further revealed that several other persons had also allegedly The material collected during investigation indicates that the matter is not confined to one or two forged documents. As per the llegedly got appointed on different posts using esulting in wrongful entry into the department and withdrawal of amounts from the Government treasury. The persons had allegedly been joined on different posts on the basis of such forged transfer orders. a larger conspiracy involving private beneficiaries as well as persons having access to the has iterated that the been falsely implicated into the FIR in not the course that the prosecution case is substantially based upon the disclosure statement is inadmissible in evidence Learned counsel has that the allegations in the FIR are vague, omnibus and do not so as to attract the It has been further contended that the AJAY KUMAR 2026.08.26 18:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- investigation already been presented against several accused and no recovery is required to be effect residents; undertake not to influence any witness Learned counsel investigation behind the bars. On strength of aforesaid submissions, the grant of anticipatory bail is entreated for. 4. anticipatory bail to the petitioner petitioner material collected has iterated that the active involvement of the petition Learned State counsel has pointed out that had disclosed that by editing forged transfer orders he had facilitated the appointment of his relative Jindal and his brother Mandeep herein) in DHBVN. It revealed a larger conspiracy involving several beneficiaries and custodial interrogation of the petitioners is network, ascertain th material and trace the alleged monetary transactions. contended that the grant of anticipatory bail, at this stage, would seriously hamper the ongoing investigation. -40668-2026 investigation qua the main accused has substantially progressed already been presented against several accused and no recovery is required to be effect from the petitioners. Furthermore, ; have clean antecedents; are r undertake not to influence any witness Learned counsel has asserted that the investigation and hence no useful purpose would be served by sending the bars. On strength of aforesaid submissions, the grant of anticipatory bail is entreated for. In oppugnation, learned State counsel has opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners by arguing that the allegations against the rs are grave in nature and their involvement material collected during the course of investigation has iterated that the investigation conducted active involvement of the petitioners in the commission of the offence. Learned State counsel has pointed out that disclosed that by editing forged transfer orders he had facilitated the appointment of his relative Jindal and his brother Mandeep in DHBVN. It has been further contended revealed a larger conspiracy involving several beneficiaries and custodial interrogation of the petitioners is necessary network, ascertain the role of other persons material and trace the alleged monetary transactions. contended that the grant of anticipatory bail, at this stage, would seriously hamper the ongoing investigation. Accordingly, 3 accused has substantially progressed, challan has already been presented against several accused and no recovery is required Furthermore, the petitioners are permanent are ready to join the investigation undertake not to influence any witness(s) or tamper with the evidence that the petitioners are ready to join the no useful purpose would be served by sending them the bars. On strength of aforesaid submissions, the grant of earned State counsel has opposed the grant of by arguing that the allegations against the and their involvement has surfaced from the during the course of investigation. Learned State counsel investigation conducted so far has clearly revealed the in the commission of the offence. Learned State counsel has pointed out that co-accused –– Munish Kumar disclosed that by editing forged transfer orders he had facilitated the appointment of his relative Jindal and his brother Mandeep (petitioners has been further contended that the investigation has revealed a larger conspiracy involving several beneficiaries and custodial necessary to identify the complete e role of other persons involved, recover incriminating material and trace the alleged monetary transactions. It has further been contended that the grant of anticipatory bail, at this stage, would seriously Accordingly, a prayer has been made for challan has already been presented against several accused and no recovery is required the petitioners are permanent eady to join the investigation & or tamper with the evidence. ready to join the them the bars. On strength of aforesaid submissions, the grant of earned State counsel has opposed the grant of by arguing that the allegations against the from the . Learned State counsel far has clearly revealed the in the commission of the offence. Munish Kumar disclosed that by editing forged transfer orders he had facilitated the (petitioners that the investigation has revealed a larger conspiracy involving several beneficiaries and custodial to identify the complete , recover incriminating It has further been contended that the grant of anticipatory bail, at this stage, would seriously a prayer has been made for AJAY KUMAR 2026.08.26 18:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- the dismissal investigation into the alleged offence. 5. gone through the available record of the case. 6. Hon’ble Supreme Court titled as Punjab, 2025 INSC 320, -40668-2026 dismissal of the instant petition investigation into the alleged offence. I have heard the learned counsel for the gone through the available record of the case. It would be apposite to refer herein to a judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court titled as Devinder Kumar Bansal vs. The State of Punjab, 2025 INSC 320, relevant whereof reads as under: “21. The parameters for grant of anticipatory bail in a serious offe like corruption are required to be granted only in exceptional circumstances where the Court is prima facie of the view that the applicant has been falsely enroped in the crime or the allegations are politically motivated or are frivolous. So far as the case at hand is concerned, it cannot be said that any exceptional circumstances have been made out by the petitioner accused for grant of anticipatory bail and there is no frivolity in the prosecution. 22. In the aforesaid context, we may refer to a pronouncement in Central Bureau of Investigation v. V. Vijay Sai Reddy reported in (2013) 7 Scale 15, wherein this Court expressed thus: “28. While granting bail, the court has to keep in mind the nature of accusation, the nature of evidence in support thereof, the severity of the punishment which conviction will entail, the character of the accused, circumstances which are peculiar to the accused, reasonable possibility of securing the presence of the accused at the trial, reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being tampered with, the larger interests of the public/State and other similar considerations. It has also to be kept in mind th the purpose of granting bail, the Legislature has used the words "reasonable grounds for believing" instead of "the evidence" which means the Court dealing with the grant of bail can only satisfy it as to whether there is a genuine case against the and that the prosecution will be able to produce prima facie evidence in support of the charge. It is not expected, at this stage, to have the evidence establishing the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.” 23. The presumption of innoce consideration for grant of anticipatory bail. The presumption of 4 in order to facilitate effective I have heard the learned counsel for the rival parties and have gone through the available record of the case. It would be apposite to refer herein to a judgment of the Devinder Kumar Bansal vs. The State of relevant whereof reads as under: The parameters for grant of anticipatory bail in a serious offe like corruption are required to be satisfied. Anticipatory bail can be granted only in exceptional circumstances where the Court is prima facie of the view that the applicant has been falsely enroped in the crime or the vated or are frivolous. So far as the case at hand is concerned, it cannot be said that any exceptional circumstances have been made out by the petitioner accused for grant of anticipatory bail and there is no frivolity in the prosecution. oresaid context, we may refer to a pronouncement in Central Bureau of Investigation v. V. Vijay Sai Reddy reported in (2013) , wherein this Court expressed thus: “28. While granting bail, the court has to keep in mind the nature of accusation, the nature of evidence in support thereof, the severity of the punishment which conviction will entail, the character of the accused, circumstances which are peculiar to the accused, reasonable possibility of securing the presence of the accused at the trial, reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being tampered with, the larger interests of the public/State and other similar considerations. It has also to be kept in mind that for the purpose of granting bail, the Legislature has used the words "reasonable grounds for believing" instead of "the evidence" which means the Court dealing with the grant of bail can only satisfy it as to whether there is a genuine case against the accused and that the prosecution will be able to produce prima facie evidence in support of the charge. It is not expected, at this stage, to have the evidence establishing the guilt of the accused beyond The presumption of innocence, by itself, cannot be the sole consideration for grant of anticipatory bail. The presumption of facilitate effective and have It would be apposite to refer herein to a judgment of the Devinder Kumar Bansal vs. The State of The parameters for grant of anticipatory bail in a serious offence satisfied. Anticipatory bail can be granted only in exceptional circumstances where the Court is prima facie of the view that the applicant has been falsely enroped in the crime or the vated or are frivolous. So far as the case at hand is concerned, it cannot be said that any exceptional circumstances have been made out by the petitioner accused for grant of anticipatory oresaid context, we may refer to a pronouncement in Central Bureau of Investigation v. V. Vijay Sai Reddy reported in (2013) “28. While granting bail, the court has to keep in mind the nature of accusation, the nature of evidence in support thereof, the severity of the punishment which conviction will entail, the character of the accused, circumstances which are peculiar to the accused, reasonable possibility of securing the presence of the accused at the trial, reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being tampered with, the larger interests of the public/State and at for the purpose of granting bail, the Legislature has used the words "reasonable grounds for believing" instead of "the evidence" which means the Court dealing with the grant of bail can only accused and that the prosecution will be able to produce prima facie evidence in support of the charge. It is not expected, at this stage, to have the evidence establishing the guilt of the accused beyond sole consideration for grant of anticipatory bail. The presumption of AJAY KUMAR 2026.08.26 18:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- 7. serious allegations have been levelled against the petitioner perusal of the FIR Munish Kumar was working in DHBVN and had access to the official -40668-2026 innocence is one of the considerations, which the court should keep in mind while considering the plea for anticipatory bail. The salutary rule is to balance the cause of the accused and the cause of public justice. Over solicitous homage to the accused’s liberty can, sometimes, defeat the cause of public justice. 24. If liberty is to be denied to an accused to ensure corruption free society, then the courts should not hesitate in denying such liberty. Where overwhelming considerations in the nature aforesaid require denial of anticipatory bail, it has to be denied. It is altogether a different thing to say that once the investigation is over and charge may consider to grant regular bail to a public servant indulging in corruption. 25. Avarice is a common frailty of mankind and Robert Walpole's famous pronouncement that all men have their price, notwithstanding the unsavoury cynicism that it suggests, is not very far from truth. As far back as more than two centuries ago, it was Burke who cautioned: “Among a people generally corrupt, liberty cannot last long”. In more recent years, Romain Rolland lamented that France f without indignation. Corruption has, in it, very dangerous potentialities. Corruption, a word of wide connotation has, in respect of almost all the spheres of our day to day life, all the world over, the limited meaning of allowing decisions and actions to be influenced not by the rights or wrongs of a case but by the prospects of monetary gains or other selfish considerations. 26. If even a fraction of what was the vox pupuli about the magnitude of corruption to be true, then it would not be far removed from the truth, that it is the rampant corruption indulged in with impunity by highly placed persons that has led to economic unrest in this country. If one is asked to name one sole factor that effectively arrested the pr society to prosperity, undeniably it is corruption. If the society in a developing country faces a menace greater than even the one from the hired assassins to its law and order, then that is from the corrupt elements at the higher echelons of the Government and of the political parties. As per the case put forth in the FIR in question, indubitably, serious allegations have been levelled against the petitioner perusal of the FIR and the material available on record, Munish Kumar was working in DHBVN and had access to the official 5 innocence is one of the considerations, which the court should keep in mind while considering the plea for anticipatory bail. The salutary rule is e the cause of the accused and the cause of public justice. Over solicitous homage to the accused’s liberty can, sometimes, defeat the If liberty is to be denied to an accused to ensure corruption free ts should not hesitate in denying such liberty. Where overwhelming considerations in the nature aforesaid require denial of anticipatory bail, it has to be denied. It is altogether a different thing to say that once the investigation is over and charge-sheet is filed, the court may consider to grant regular bail to a public servant - accused of Avarice is a common frailty of mankind and Robert Walpole's famous pronouncement that all men have their price, notwithstanding the savoury cynicism that it suggests, is not very far from truth. As far back as more than two centuries ago, it was Burke who cautioned: “Among a people generally corrupt, liberty cannot last long”. In more recent years, Romain Rolland lamented that France fell because there was corruption without indignation. Corruption has, in it, very dangerous potentialities. Corruption, a word of wide connotation has, in respect of almost all the spheres of our day to day life, all the world over, the limited meaning of allowing decisions and actions to be influenced not by the rights or case but by the prospects of monetary gains or other selfish If even a fraction of what was the vox pupuli about the magnitude then it would not be far removed from the truth, that it is the rampant corruption indulged in with impunity by highly placed persons that has led to economic unrest in this country. If one is asked to name one sole factor that effectively arrested the progress of our society to prosperity, undeniably it is corruption. If the society in a developing country faces a menace greater than even the one from the hired assassins to its law and order, then that is from the corrupt elements f the Government and of the political parties.” As per the case put forth in the FIR in question, indubitably, serious allegations have been levelled against the petitioners. From the and the material available on record, co-accused Munish Kumar was working in DHBVN and had access to the official innocence is one of the considerations, which the court should keep in mind while considering the plea for anticipatory bail. The salutary rule is e the cause of the accused and the cause of public justice. Over solicitous homage to the accused’s liberty can, sometimes, defeat the If liberty is to be denied to an accused to ensure corruption free ts should not hesitate in denying such liberty. Where overwhelming considerations in the nature aforesaid require denial of anticipatory bail, it has to be denied. It is altogether a different thing to et is filed, the court accused of Avarice is a common frailty of mankind and Robert Walpole's famous pronouncement that all men have their price, notwithstanding the savoury cynicism that it suggests, is not very far from truth. As far back as more than two centuries ago, it was Burke who cautioned: “Among a people generally corrupt, liberty cannot last long”. In more recent years, ell because there was corruption without indignation. Corruption has, in it, very dangerous potentialities. Corruption, a word of wide connotation has, in respect of almost all the spheres of our day to day life, all the world over, the limited meaning of allowing decisions and actions to be influenced not by the rights or case but by the prospects of monetary gains or other selfish If even a fraction of what was the vox pupuli about the magnitude then it would not be far removed from the truth, that it is the rampant corruption indulged in with impunity by highly placed persons that has led to economic unrest in this country. If one is ogress of our society to prosperity, undeniably it is corruption. If the society in a developing country faces a menace greater than even the one from the hired assassins to its law and order, then that is from the corrupt elements As per the case put forth in the FIR in question, indubitably, From the accused – Munish Kumar was working in DHBVN and had access to the official AJAY KUMAR 2026.08.26 18:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- system. During the editing transfer orders he facilitated the appointment of petitioner Jindal, who was his relative petitioner No.1) several other persons were similarly appointed through forged transfer orders. The allegations against the petitioners pertain to their alle involvement in a conspiracy whereby forged transfer orders were allegedly prepared and used for securing appointments in the DHBVN under the outsourcing policy followed by withdrawal of salary from the Government treasury thereby causing financial loss this Court is not required to conduct a detailed examination of the evidence or record a finding regarding the guilt considering a prayer for view the nature and gravity of the allegations, the material collected during investigation, the manner in which the alleged offence was committed, the possibility of further discovery of material and the requirement of effective investigat order to obtain appointment in UHBVN conspiracy and financial loss to the State exchequer. petitioners that they have not been named in the origi persuade this Court at this stage. M cannot, by itself bail particularly subsequently s that no recovery is this Court -40668-2026 During the course of investigation, he allegedly disclosed that by editing transfer orders he facilitated the appointment of petitioner Jindal, who was his relative and petitioner petitioner No.1), in DHBVN. The investigation several other persons were similarly appointed through forged transfer The allegations against the petitioners pertain to their alle involvement in a conspiracy whereby forged transfer orders were allegedly prepared and used for securing appointments in the DHBVN under the outsourcing policy followed by withdrawal of salary from the Government treasury thereby causing financial loss to the State ex this Court is not required to conduct a detailed examination of the evidence or record a finding regarding the guilt/innocence of the petitioners. considering a prayer for grant of anticipatory bail, the Court view the nature and gravity of the allegations, the material collected during investigation, the manner in which the alleged offence was committed, the possibility of further discovery of material and the requirement of effective investigation. The instant case pertains to forgery of official documents in order to obtain appointment in UHBVN conspiracy and financial loss to the State exchequer. petitioners that they have not been named in the origi persuade this Court at this stage. Mere absence of the by itself, be treated as a ground particularly when material showing the subsequently surfaced during the course of that no recovery is to be effected from the petitioners also does not persuade this Court as the investigation is still in progress 6 investigation, he allegedly disclosed that by editing transfer orders he facilitated the appointment of petitioner No.1 and petitioner No.2 –– Mandeep (brother of , in DHBVN. The investigation has further indicated that several other persons were similarly appointed through forged transfer The allegations against the petitioners pertain to their alleged involvement in a conspiracy whereby forged transfer orders were allegedly prepared and used for securing appointments in the DHBVN under the outsourcing policy followed by withdrawal of salary from the Government to the State ex-chequer. At this stage, this Court is not required to conduct a detailed examination of the evidence innocence of the petitioners. While anticipatory bail, the Court has to keep in view the nature and gravity of the allegations, the material collected during investigation, the manner in which the alleged offence was committed, the possibility of further discovery of material and the requirement of effective The instant case pertains to forgery of official documents in order to obtain appointment in UHBVN coupled with allegations of conspiracy and financial loss to the State exchequer. The plea of the petitioners that they have not been named in the original FIR does not ere absence of the name in the FIR sufficient for grant of anticipatory material showing the involvement of an accused has the course of investigation. The contention from the petitioners also does not persuade the investigation is still in progress. As regard to the role investigation, he allegedly disclosed that by No.1 –– Mandeep (brother of that several other persons were similarly appointed through forged transfer ged involvement in a conspiracy whereby forged transfer orders were allegedly prepared and used for securing appointments in the DHBVN under the outsourcing policy followed by withdrawal of salary from the Government At this stage, this Court is not required to conduct a detailed examination of the evidence hile has to keep in view the nature and gravity of the allegations, the material collected during investigation, the manner in which the alleged offence was committed, the possibility of further discovery of material and the requirement of effective The instant case pertains to forgery of official documents in coupled with allegations of The plea of the nal FIR does not in the FIR for grant of anticipatory has investigation. The contention from the petitioners also does not persuade role AJAY KUMAR 2026.08.26 18:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- ascribed to the petitioner at this stage commission of offence. 8. collected during investigation, it cannot be said that the allegations the petitioner petitioner was not named in the initial this stage. common intention and joint participation as reflected from the petitioner collected during the course of investigation which prosecution version disclosure statement in the offence effectively undertaken only through in the FIR and the material collected during prima facie which the role of the present petitioner the considered opinion of this Court, petitioner impede the recovery of material evidence. agency before this Court is that the is necessary co-accused who may be involved in the considering the plea for anticipatory bail, the Court is not to evaluate the -40668-2026 ascribed to the petitioners, the material placed at this stage, prima facie indicates that they commission of offence. From a prima facie reading of the FIR and the material collected during investigation, it cannot be said that the allegations the petitioners are wholly vague or devoid of substance. petitioner was not named in the initial FIR this stage. The material collected so far common intention and joint participation as reflected from the disclosure statement petitioners, though emerging at a subsequent stage, is collected during the course of investigation which prosecution version. In the considered view of this Court disclosure statement(s) and the extent of in the offence, are matter(s) requiring thorough investigation effectively undertaken only through custodial interrogation in the FIR and the material collected during prima facie disclose an offence of cheating which the role of the present petitioners is the considered opinion of this Court, petitioners, at this stage, would hamper the ongoing investigation and impede the recovery of material evidence. agency before this Court is that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner necessary to recover the forged documents and ascertain the role of other accused who may be involved in the offence in question considering the plea for anticipatory bail, the Court is not to evaluate the 7 placed on record before this Court, they have actively participated in the reading of the FIR and the material collected during investigation, it cannot be said that the allegations against are wholly vague or devoid of substance. The plea that the FIR does not inspire confidence at The material collected so far reflects prima facie evidence of common intention and joint participation of the petitioners and co-accused, disclosure statement. The alleged involvement of the emerging at a subsequent stage, is supported by material collected during the course of investigation which lends corroboration to the considered view of this Court, the veracity of the extent of the involvement of the petitioner requiring thorough investigation which can be custodial interrogation. The allegations in the FIR and the material collected during the course of investigation cheating and criminal conspiracy in is currently under investigation. In the considered opinion of this Court, granting anticipatory bail to the would hamper the ongoing investigation and impede the recovery of material evidence. The stand of the investigating custodial interrogation of the petitioner to recover the forged documents and ascertain the role of other offence in question. At the stage of considering the plea for anticipatory bail, the Court is not to evaluate the on record before this Court, actively participated in the reading of the FIR and the material against The plea that the idence at evidence of accused, . The alleged involvement of the supported by material lends corroboration to the veracity of the of the petitioners which can be The allegations ation and criminal conspiracy in . In granting anticipatory bail to the would hamper the ongoing investigation and The stand of the investigating custodial interrogation of the petitioners to recover the forged documents and ascertain the role of other At the stage of considering the plea for anticipatory bail, the Court is not to evaluate the AJAY KUMAR 2026.08.26 18:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- evidence but only to see whether offence. In the considered opinion of this Court, granting anticipatory bail at this stage 9. remedy and i Court is satisfied that the accused has been falsely implicated and that custodial interrogation is not required. possibility of involvement of multiple pers conspiracy, if any, behind the occurrence petitioner this nascent stage stage, from which it can be deciphered that the petitioner implicated into the FIR considering a plea for between safegua 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 stage, there is no material on record to hold that made out against the petitioner. The material which has come on record and preliminary investigation, appear to accusations. Thus, it is not appropriate to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner investigation. In 1039, the Hon'ble Supreme Court h -40668-2026 evidence but only to see whether prima f offence. In the considered opinion of this Court, granting anticipatory bail at this stage is likely to hamper the ongoing investigation. It is a trite law that the anticipatory bail is an extraordinary remedy and is to be granted only in exceptional circumstances where the Court is satisfied that the accused has been falsely implicated and that custodial interrogation is not required. Considering the nature of allegations, possibility of involvement of multiple pers conspiracy, if any, behind the occurrence petitioners, it is not appropriate to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner this nascent stage. No cause nay plausible cause has been shown, at th stage, from which it can be deciphered that the petitioner implicated into the FIR in question. It is befitting to mention here that while considering a plea for 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 free investigation as also the deeper and wider impact of such alleged iniquities on the society. At this stage, there is no material on record to hold that made out against the petitioner. The material which has come on record and preliminary investigation, appear to establish accusations. Thus, it is not appropriate to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, 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) 8 prima facie allegations disclose a serious offence. In the considered opinion of this Court, granting anticipatory bail likely to hamper the ongoing investigation. It is a trite law that the anticipatory bail is an extraordinary s to be granted only in exceptional circumstances where the Court is satisfied that the accused has been falsely implicated and that Considering the nature of allegations, possibility of involvement of multiple persons and to uncover the broader conspiracy, if any, behind the occurrence coupled with the role of the , it is not appropriate to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners plausible cause has been shown, at th stage, from which it can be deciphered that the petitioners have been falsely . It is befitting to mention here that while grant of anticipatory bail, the Court has to equilibrate rding 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 ged iniquities on the society. At this stage, there is no material on record to hold that prima facie case is not made out against the petitioner. The material which has come on record and establish a reasonable basis for the accusations. Thus, it is not appropriate to grant anticipatory bail to the , as it would necessarily cause impediment in effective State v. Anil Sharma, (1997) 7 SCC 187 : 1997 SCC (Cri) eld as under : (SCC p. 189, para 6) allegations disclose a serious offence. In the considered opinion of this Court, granting anticipatory bail It is a trite law that the anticipatory bail is an extraordinary s to be granted only in exceptional circumstances where the Court is satisfied that the accused has been falsely implicated and that Considering the nature of allegations, the broader coupled with the role of the s at plausible cause has been shown, at this been falsely . It is befitting to mention here that while grant of anticipatory bail, the Court has to equilibrate rding 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 ged iniquities on the society. At this case is not made out against the petitioner. The material which has come on record and or the accusations. Thus, it is not appropriate to grant anticipatory bail to the , as it would necessarily cause impediment in effective State v. Anil Sharma, (1997) 7 SCC 187 : 1997 SCC (Cri) AJAY KUMAR 2026.08.26 18:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- 10. the petitioner persons as also the thorough investigation, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner milieu of the case in hand. 11. (i) (ii) of opinion upon merits of the case/investigation. (iii) August 26, Ajay -40668-2026 “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. 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 kno 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 responsible police officers would conduct themselves in task of disinte would not conduct themselves as offenders. In view of the gravity of the allegations, the petitioners as beneficiaries, the larger conspiracy involving several as also the necessity of custodial interrogation for a fair and thorough investigation, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioners do not deserve the concession of anticipatory bail in the factual 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. August 26, 2026 Whether speaking/reasoned: Whether reportable: 9 “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. 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 a mere ritual. The argument that the custodial interrogation is fraught f 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.” In view of the gravity of the allegations, the role attributed to the larger conspiracy involving several necessity of custodial interrogation for a fair and thorough investigation, this Court is of the considered opinion that the do not deserve the concession of anticipatory bail in the factual venient 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. on(s), if any, shall also stand disposed off. (SUMEET GOEL) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No “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 ws that he is well arrest bail order during the time he is interrogated. Very often interrogation in such a condition would reduce to a mere ritual. The argument that the custodial interrogation is fraught 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 ring offences the role attributed to the larger conspiracy involving several necessity of custodial interrogation for a fair and thorough investigation, this Court is of the considered opinion that the do not deserve the concession of anticipatory bail in the factual petition is devoid of merits and is hereby dismissed. Nothing said hereinabove shall be deemed to be an expression AJAY KUMAR 2026.08.26 18:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document