CRM-M-34448-2026 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 224 CRM-M-34448-2026 Decided on : 27.08.2026 VIKRAMJEET SINGH ALIAS BIKRAMJEET SINGH ......Petitioner Versus STATE OF HARYANA ......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH Present: Mr. Gursimran Singh Madaan, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Pawan Kumar Garg, DAG, Haryana. **** SANJAY VASHISTH, J. 1. The instant petition has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 439 Cr.P.C.), for grant of regular bail to the petitioner, during the pendency of trial, who has been booked in a criminal case arising out of First Information Report, as detailed hereunder:- Name of Petitioner(s) FIR No. Date Section(s) Police Station District Vikramjeet Singh @ Bikramjeet Singh, aged about 39 years 67 22.03.2024 406, 420 of IPC (correspondin g to sections 316(2) and 318(4) of BNS) Farakpur Yamunanag ar 2. Complainant namely Sudhir Kumar, got registered the FIR, and case of the prosecution, as discussed in the order dated 27.05.2026 LAVISHA 2026.08.27 15:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC, Chandigarh CRM-M-34448-2026 2 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Yamunanagar (Annexure P- 7), is reproduced here under, for reference:- “Sudhir Kumar to the effect that accused persons had cheated the complainant and other persons by forming a firm in the name of AGR Business Zone India Pvt. Limited, Urban Estate, Phase-1, Patiala. On 22.12.2019, accused Rahul, who introduced himself as M.D. of the company and asked him to invest amount in the company and assured him that they will return double the amount invested within a short span. On believing their promise, complainant invested Rs.3,59,700/- by transferring the money in the Bank account No.398105000116, ICICI Bank, Patiala and in account No.50100132361991, HDFC Bank Barara and the said amount was transferred by the accused persons in the name of Jasvinder Kaur bearing Account No.2918101005580, Canara Bank. The complainant also advised his friends/relatives to invest the money in the said scheme namely Hemlata, Kiran etc. and in this way, they invested Rs.9,26,500/-. After some days, accused persons closed their firm. On their asking they told that they have closed the firm and they can invest the money in the other firm formed by them. When the complainant party demanded their money back, the accused persons threatened to kill them and refused to return the money.” On the basis of the aforementioned allegations, FIR in question was registered. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner had earlier filed a petition seeking pre-arrest bail, i.e. CRM-M-58692-2024, LAVISHA 2026.08.27 15:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC, Chandigarh CRM-M-34448-2026 3 wherein, vide order dated 25.11.2024 (Annexure P-2), he was directed to deposit an amount of Rs.5 lacs in the form of an FDR drawn in favour of the Registrar General of this Court. Pursuant thereto, an amount of Rs.3.5 lacs was released by the petitioner in favour of the complainant by way of a demand draft. Thereafter, vide order dated 04.04.2025 passed in CRM-M-58692-2024 (Annexure P-3), dispute was referred to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court for exploring the modalities of an amicable settlement. When the matter relating to the said anticipatory bail petition was again taken up for hearing on 21.05.2025 (Annexure P-4), the coordinate Bench of this Court observed that the accused persons had set up a firm under the name and style of “AGR Business Zone India Pvt. Ltd.” and that, allegedly, on the inducement of the accused, complainant had invested the amount under the premise that investment would be doubled. Since the petitioner could not deposit the entire amount of Rs.5 lacs as directed earlier by this Court, the petition seeking pre-arrest bail was dismissed, vide order dated 21.05.2025 (Annexure P-4). 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that, consequent upon the dismissal of the pre-arrest bail petition, petitioner was arrested and is inside jail since 10.05.2026, and has, thus, remained incarcerated for approximately three months. 5. Highlighting the financial constraints of the petitioner, learned counsel submits that the amount allegedly misappropriated from the complainant was Rs.3,59,700/-, out of which the major portion, i.e. LAVISHA 2026.08.27 15:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC, Chandigarh CRM-M-34448-2026 4 Rs.3.5 lacs, has already been paid by the petitioner pursuant to the directions of this Court, though the allegations against him are yet to be established at trial. 6. It is further submitted that petitioner has already undergone a substantial period of incarceration and his further detention is not warranted. Learned counsel, accordingly, prays that petitioner be enlarged on regular bail in the present case. 7. In response to the arguments addressed by learned counsel for the petitioner, learned State counsel, produces the custody certificate dated 24.08.2026 in Court today, which is taken on record. Office to tag the same at appropriate place. A copy thereof has been handed over to the counsel for the petitioner. As per the custody certificate, in the present case, petitioner has already undergone 03 months and 14 days period inside jail. 8. Learned State counsel, while opposing the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that present case involves a large-scale fraud involving a substantial amount, and there are other investors who have also allegedly been defrauded. It is further submitted that, apart from the present case, petitioner is involved in several other criminal cases. Learned State counsel, therefore, prays for dismissal of the present petition. 9. This Court has heard the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and has also perused the record available on the file. LAVISHA 2026.08.27 15:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC, Chandigarh CRM-M-34448-2026 5 10. Having regard to the totality of facts and circumstances of the case, nature of the allegations levelled against the petitioner, factors noticed here above, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court deems it appropriate to extend the concession of regular bail to the petitioner in the present case. Consequently, prayer made in the present petition is allowed. Petitioner is ordered to be released on bail, subject to his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/ Chief Judicial Magistrate/ Illaqa Magistrate/ Duty Magistrate concerned, if not required in any other case. 11. Needless to observe that the petitioner shall not extend any threat and shall not influence any prosecution witness in any manner directly or indirectly. 12. Any of the discussion done and recorded here above, shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the facts of the case. Therefore, trial Court is expected to decide the case by taking an independent view, on the basis of evidence available on record, as expeditiously as possible, in accordance with law. 13. Petition stands disposed of. (SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE 27.08.2026 Lavisha Whether Speaking/Reasoned: YES/NO Whether Reportable: YES/NO LAVISHA 2026.08.27 15:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC, Chandigarh