Bhagat Pre at Preet Singh v. Vers State of Pun of Punjab CRM
Case Details
CRM-M- -33275-2024 1- -1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA IN CHANDIGA PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT DIGARH 290 Bhagat Pre at Preet Singh Versus Vers State of Pun of Punjab CRM-M-33275-2024 .2025 Date of Decision: 13.11.2025 …Petitioner. …Respondent. CORAM: AM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE AA CE AARADHNA SAWHNEY. Present: Mr. GBS Dhillon, Senior Adv Mr. Jagdeep S. Bajwa, Advoca or Advocate with dvocate for the petitioner. Mr. Hardeep Hans, Assistant A stant Advocate General, Punjab. Mr. Rahul Bhargava, Advocate Ms. Reetika Sabharwal, Advoc vocate with Advocate for the complainant. **** AARADHN ADHNA SAWHNEY, J. (Oral) 1. Petitioner, an accused in case n case FIR No. 0006 dated 29.01.202 .2024, under Sect r Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 506 , 506 of Indian Penal Code, registere gistered against him st him at Police Station Sarabha Naga a Nagar, Ludhiana, has filed the prese present petition for ion for grant of anticipatory bail. 2. Relevant facts as emerging fr ging from the documents on record b cord be noticed her ed hereinbelow:- Criminal proceedings in the pr he present case were registered on th on the complaint d int dated 29.1.2024 moved by Dani anish Irfan Aaga, who claimed to b to be caretaker i ker in India of three Afghanistan co n companies, namely, Tak Dry Fru Fruit, Najeb Ami Amin Ltd. and Noor Ahmad Baher aher Ahmade Ltd., dealing in impor mport, GURBACHAN SINGH 2025.11.18 09:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- -33275-2024 2- -2 export of d of dry fruits in different countries. I . In June, 2023, a meeting was he s held between P n President of Tak Dry Fruit C uit Company, namely, Mukhamma mmad Dzhamil w il with petitioner-Bhagat Preet Sin t Singh, resident of L-6, Hazi Stree Street, MK Road oad, Guru Harkrishan Nagar, ar, Khanna, District Ludhiana, a, in connection tion with business of dry fruits. I s. In the said meeting, as has bee s been further alle alleged in the complaint, petitioner oner Bhagat Preet Singh had assure ssured with within ithin three days of receipt of the m the material, the payments would b uld be deposited ted by him in the account of abo above mentioned three companie anies. Thereafter, fter, the dry fruits worth Rs.5 crores rores was delivered to the company any of petitioner, ner, namely, M/s Fresh Nuts Overse verseas. The payment of Rs.5 cror crores was deposi posited by petitioner. Complainan inant next pointed out that thereaft eafter Najeb Am Amin Ltd., Afghanistan supplied lied dry fruits to the company ny of petitioner ner on 197.2023, 7.9.2023, 12.9 12.9.2023 and 6.11.2023 for US USD 297063.40. 3.40. Tak Dry Fruit Company, Afgh Afghanistan also supplied dry fruits uits to the compan mpany of petitioner on various date dates followed by supply of dry frui fruits by Noor Ah r Ahmad Baher Ahmad Ltd. on 20 n 20.8.2023. In all the total value lue of dry fruits s its supplied to petitioner was Rs.7. s.7.18 crores. The said amount wa nt was not deposit posited by petitioner despite the fact fact that he kept on assuring that th at the needful wo l would be done. On some occasion asions, petitioner also threatened th d that since the m he material supplied to him has not not been sold and that whenever th er the same is so is sold, the money would be depos eposited. After buying time for fe r few months, p s, petitioner whose intention wa was to cheat three Afghanista nistan companies nies from whom he had received ved dry fruits worth Rs.7.18 crore rores, stopped att d attending the calls. It is further t er the allegation of complainant th nt that on 17.10.20 10.2023, a fake statement of Swift M ift Message MT-103 of Axis Bank Lt k Ltd. GURBACHAN SINGH 2025.11.18 09:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- -33275-2024 3- -3 was sent b nt by petitioner indicating that he h he had deposited the payment of d of dry fruits of U of USD 63600, which were supplie pplied to him on 20.8.2023 by Noo Noor Ahmad Bah Bahar Ahmad Ltd. However, when when the statement was checked fro d from Axis Bank, ank, the code was found to be fake fake and in fact no money had bee been deposited ted by petitioner. On 22.1.202 .2024, a complaint was made de to Commissio issioner of Police, Ludhiana. In In pursuance of which, prese resent petitioner ner and his other accomplice visit visited Ludhiana. On 23.1.2024 24, a compromis omise was arrived at between the the parties. In pursuance theret ereto, petitioner d ner deposited Rs.19 lakhs in the acc account of complainant. Rs.31 lakh lakhs was to be be deposited on 24.1.2024. As ag s against the terms and conditions ons of compromis omise, only Rs.11 lakhs was depos eposited by petitioner. Even furth urther payment w nt was also not made. Thus, in crux crux, the allegation of complainant ant is that apart art from sending a forged Swift Co t Code assuring that money has bee s been deposited i ted in the account of M/s Noor Ahm Ahmad Baher Ahmad, the terms an s and conditions ions of the subsequent compromise
Facts
ise arrived at between the parties o ies on 23.1.2024 024 were also not adhered to by p by petitioner, who thus, intentional onally cheated the d the three Afghanistan companies, w , who had supplied dry fruits wor worth Rs.7.18 cro 8 crores. On the basis of said comp omplaint, a formal case vide FIR N IR No. 0006 dated ated 29.01.2024, under Sections 42 ns 420, 467, 468, 471, 506 of India Indian Penal Cod Code, was registered against him a im at Police Station Sarabha Naga agar, Ludhiana na. Apprehending his arrest, peti t, petitioner moved an application fo tion for grant of pr of pre-arrest bail. The same was was dismissed by learned Addition ditional Sessions Ju ions Judge, Ludhiana in terms of orde f order dated 19.2.2024. Aggrieved o ieved of which, pres , present petition has been filed. GURBACHAN SINGH 2025.11.18 09:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- -33275-2024 4- -4 3. Learned counsel for the petit e petitioner submits that petitioner ha ner has been falsely falsely implicated in the present case. t case. A bare perusal of the allegation egations levelled in led in the FIR would reveal that the di the dispute being purely commercial ercial in nature has e has deliberately been given a crim a criminal colour only with a view view to harass the s the petitioner and to extract illeg m him. t illegal monetary benefit from him Continuing
Legal Reasoning
being on the prima facie issue ssues including consideration of som f some reasonable grounds that woul would go to show if the accused ha d has committed the offence or thos those facts that would reflect on th on the seriousness of the offence. The . The self-imposed restraint on delvin elving deep into the analysis of the e the evidence at that stage is for val valid reasons, namely, to prevent an nt any prejudice to the case set up b up by the prosecution or the defence ence likely to be taken by the accuse cused and to keep all aspects of t of the matter open till the trial rial is concluded. 12. In Prasanta Kumar Sa r Sarkar's case (supra) (Prasan asanta Kumar Sarkar Vs. Ashish Ch h Chatterjee and another), a Divisio ivision Bench of this Court had highli ighlighted the factors that ought to b t to be borne in mind while con considering the anticipatory ba bail application and had stated tha that :- "9. We are of the opinion tha n that the impugned order is clear learly unsustainable. It is trite that that this Court does not, normall mally, GURBACHAN SINGH 2025.11.18 09:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- -33275-2024 8- -8 interfere with an order passe assed by the High Court granting o ing or rejecting bail to the accused. sed. However, it is equally incumbe mbent upon the High Court to exe exercise its discretion judiciousl iously, cautiously and strictly in com compliance with the basic principl ciples laid down in a plethora of dec f decisions of this Court on the poin point. It is well settled that, among o ng other circumstances, the factors tors to be borne in mind while conside nsidering an application for bail are l are: (i) whether there is any prim prima facie or reasonable ground und to believe that the accused had co ad committed the offence; (ii) nature and gravity of the a he accusation; (iii)severity of the punishment ent in the event of conviction; (iv)danger of the accused abs absconding or fleeing, if released o sed on bail; (v) character, behaviour, mea means, position and standing of th of the accused; (vi) likelihood of the offence be ce being repeated; (vii) reasonable apprehension sion of the witnesses being influence enced; and (viii) danger, of course, of just of justice being thwarted by grant of bail.” 9. In Nikita Jagganath Shetty @ etty @ Nikita Vishwajeet Jadhav v av vs. The State tate of Maharashtra and another, her, 2025 AIR SC 3375, the Hon’b Hon’ble Supreme C eme Court held that “Anticipatory ba ry bail is an exceptional remedy an y and ought not t not to be granted in a routine manne nner.” 10. Hon’ble Supreme Court in rt in plethora of judicial preceden cedents including ding Gurbaksh Singh v. State of Pun Punjab, AIR 1980 SC 1632, has tim has time and again r gain reiterated that while considering dering the anticipatory bail the Court Court is to take int ke into consideration the facts like s like gravity of offence, chances o nces of accused tam sed tampering with the evidence and e and probabilities of his fleeing fro ng from justice etc. e etc. Court should be circumspect a pect about the impact of its decision o ision on GURBACHAN SINGH 2025.11.18 09:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- -33275-2024 9- -9 the society ociety as well. The anticipatory ba ory bail is an extraordinary discretio scretion which shou h should be exercised in the extraordin aordinary circumstances. 11. Factual aspects of the case lea se leading to the registration of the FI the FIR have alread already been noticed in para 2 of th of the order. In brief, the allegatio legation against the st the petitioner is that dry fruits wort s worth Rs.7.18 crores were supplied plied to M/s Fresh Fresh Nuts Overseas, (of which he h he is CEO) from three Afghanista hanistan companies. anies. However, he did not make the ake the payment despite the fact that h t that he initially kep lly kept on buying time and assuring c ring complainant that needful would b ould be done. But But after sometime, he stopped at ped attending the calls. Thereafter, eafter, a Swift Code t Code was sent indicating that pay at payment had been made but whe t when checked up ked up from Bank, the same was foun s found to be ‘fake’. The plea taken b aken by petitioner ioner that substandard dry fruits w uits was supplied by the said thre d three companies, anies, which fact was brought to his to his knowledge by other retailers an lers and wholesalers esalers also seems to be an after thoug r thought, particularly when appreciate reciated in the light e light of documents on record. Had Had it been so, there was no occasio ccasion for him to m to initially request the three Afgh e Afghanistan companies to grant hi ant him sometime a time and thereafter to send a Swift C wift Code indicating that payment ha ent has been made made. Further still, when the comp complaint was lodged by complaina plainant and the ma the matter was enquired into by the y the police authorities at Ludhiana, hiana, it remains ine ins inexplicable as to why petitioner tioner entered into a compromise. It e. It is not his ple is plea that he was compelled to sett to settle the dispute. It would also b also be appropriate opriate to point out that the compromi promise, if any, arrived at between co- accused A sed Ajay Bansal (petitioner in CR in CRM-M-38159-2024) and prese present petitioner i ioner is of no consequence at all, fo all, for, how they can decide betwee between themselves selves as to how much amount is due is due to complainant. Moreover, in th r, in the interim ord im order dated 7.6.2024 passed by l by learned Additional Sessions Judg s Judge, GURBACHAN SINGH 2025.11.18 09:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- -33275-2024 10- -10 Ludhiana ( iana (copy of which is appended alo ed along), factum of co-accused Aja ed Ajay Bansal agre al agreeing to make payment of Rs.7 f Rs.70 lakhs in account of M/s Fres /s Fresh Nuts Overs Overseas stands recorded. 12. Consequently, in view of the of the entire facts, circumstances an ces and documents ments brought on record, the Court i ourt is further of the opinion that th that the petitioner h ioner has failed to make out a case of ase of exceptional depravity/hardship dship in his favour, avour, entitling him to the grant of this of this extraordinary relief of pre-arre arrest bail. 13. 14. The petition being devoid of a id of any merit is hereby dismissed. Misc. application, if any, also
Arguments
inuing further, learned counsel conten ontends that petitioner-Chief Executiv xecutive Officer of M of M/s Fresh Nuts Overseas, has be has been dealing in the business of dr s of dry fruits for th for the last ten years. He has earned earned a good name for himself in th lf in the market. He et. He had been regularly making pay ng payment to all the three Afghanista hanistan companies anies but the consignment which wer ch were sent in September, October an ber and November, mber, 2023 were totally substan ubstandard and not fit for huma human consumptio umption. It was only when the retailer retailers informed the wholesalers abo rs about the substan ubstandard quantity of dry fruits, pe its, petitioner requested the said thre id three companies anies to take back the material point l pointing out that the wholesalers ha lers had refused to m ed to make the payment. It is also the submission ission of learned counsel hat that the th investigatio tigation in the present case has be has been far from satisfactory. Th . The highhanded handedness on the part of the Investig vestigating Officer can be gauged fro ed from the fact tha hat the wholesalers to whom the m the dry fruits had been supplied an lied and who were were never in direct contact with th with the three Afghanistan companie panies, were also a also arrayed as accused. Precisely, fo ely, for the said reason, Raman Khann Khanna, proprietor o rietor of Knight Trading Company Kh any Khari Baoli, Delhi was granted th nted the concession ession of bail by the learned Additiona ditional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana. Learned counsel for the petit e petitioner next contends that a Swi a Swift Code was was generated by petitioner was n was not fake. In any case, the sa the said GURBACHAN SINGH 2025.11.18 09:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- -33275-2024 5- -5 question of tion of fact can only be decided after d after the parties lead their respectiv spective evidence. nce. It is also the submission of ion of learned counsel that after th fter the concession ession of anticipatory bail was granted ranted to petitioner on 29.7.2024 by th by this Court, he n t, he never misused the same. Thus, Thus, prayer has been made to confir confirm order dated r dated 29.7.2024. 4. Per Contra, while opposing posing the petition for grant of bai of bail, learned cou ed counsel for complainant as also le also learned State counsel have draw e drawn the attentio ttention of this Court to the Status R Report filed by way of affidavit o t of Murad Jasv d Jasvir Singh Gill, PPS, Assistant istant Commissioner of Police (West (West), Ludhiana, w , wherein, apart from reiterating t ating the facts leading to the lodging o dging of the FIR in IR including the fact that after the c r the complaint was lodged, petition etitioner entered in ed into a compromise with the c the complainant, caretaker of thre f three Afghanistan anistan companies in India and assure assured to make the payment, but we ut went back on hi on his promise and did not adhere dhere to terms and conditions thereo thereof. From the m the material collected during the cou he course of investigation, it also cam so came to be know known that petitioner had in fact sent ct sent a forged Swift Message MT-10 103 Code indic indicating that payment had been been made. However, when ban n bank accounts w unts were checked, the code was found ound to be fake. Thus, while opposing the requ e request for grant of anticipatory bai ory bail, learned cou ed counsel for the complainant conte contends that a huge fraud of Rs.7.1 Rs.7.18 crores has b s has been intentionally committed by tted by petitioner, it is not a simple cas ple case of non-com compliance of commercial agreem agreement. Presence of petitioner, , is needed for ed for custodial interrogation to reco o recover the said amount. Prayer fo ayer for dismissal o issal of the petition has been made. GURBACHAN SINGH 2025.11.18 09:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- -33275-2024 6- -6 5. Heard learned counsel for th for the parties and have perused th sed the documents ments on record. 6. Before expressing any opinio opinion on submissions raised by bo by both the counse counsels, it would be appropriate to iate to refer to certain judgments o ents of Hon’ble Su ble Supreme Court, wherein the fa the factors to be kept in mind whi d while dealing wi ng with an application for grant o rant of anticipatory bail, have bee e been ssed. discussed. 7. Hon’ble the Supreme Cou Court in “P. Chidambaram v m vs. Directorate orate of Enforcement, (2020) 13 SC 3 SCC 791), has observed as under: nder:- “67. Ordinarily, arrest f is a part of procedure of is the th investigation to secure not onl t only the presence of the accused b ed but several other purposes. Power ower under Section 438 Cr.P.C 197 1973 is an extraordinary power an r and the same has to be exercise rcised sparingly. The privilege of the f the pre-arrest bail should be grante ranted only in exceptional cases. T s. The judicial discretion conferre erred upon the court has to be prope roperly exercised after application tion of mind as to the nature and gra gravity of the accusation; possibili ibility of applicant fleeing justice an e and other factors to decide wheth hether it is a fit case for grant ant of anticipatory bail. Grant nt of anticipatory bail to some ex e extent interferes in the sphere ere of investigation of an offence nce and hence, the court must b st be circumspect while exercisin cising such power for grant nt of anticipatory bail. Anticipator atory bail is not to be granted as as a matter of rule and it has to b to be granted only when the court ourt is GURBACHAN SINGH 2025.11.18 09:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- -33275-2024 7- -7 convinced that exceptional cir l circumstances exist to resort to th to that extraordinary remedy.” 8. Hon’ble the Supreme Court w ourt while deciding the case titled a titled as “Ms. X Vs. Vs. The State of Maharashtra and and another” (2023 SCC Online S ne SC 279) held a held as under:- “11.1. We propose to take a e a quick look at the consideration ations that ought to govern grant of a t of anticipatory bail. There are a lin a line of decisions of this court tha that have underscored the fact th ct that while deciding an application tion for bail, the court ought to refra efrain from undertaking a detailed a ed analysis of the evidence, the focu focus
Decision
, also stands disposed of. .2025 13.11.2025 gbs NEY) (AARADHNA SAWHNEY) JUDGE Whether Speaking/reasoned Whether Reportable : : Yes/No Yes/No GURBACHAN SINGH 2025.11.18 09:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document