RT OF PUNJA IN CHANDIGA PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT DIGARH Sabdar and ar and v. Vers State of Ha of Haryana CRM
Case Details
CRM-M- -40957-2024 1- -1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA IN CHANDIGA PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT DIGARH Sabdar and ar and another Versus Vers State of Ha of Haryana CRM-M-40957-2024 .2025 Date of Decision: 28.10.2025 …Petitioners. …Respondent. CORAM: AM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE AA CE AARADHNA SAWHNEY. Present: Mr. Sanjeev Majra, Advocate ocate for the petitioner. Ms. Shweta Nahata, Deputy A puty Advocate General, Haryana. Ms. Jasleen Kaur, Advocate fo cate for the complainant. **** AARADHN ADHNA SAWHNEY, J. (Oral) 1. Petitioners, who are accuse ccused in case FIR No. 371 date dated 25.6.2025 25, under Sections 318(4), 316(2), 16(2), 61 of BNS, registered at Polic t Police Station Gha Gharaunda, District Karnal, have filed the present petition for gra or grant of anticipat ticipatory bail. 2. Relevant facts as emerging fr ging from the documents on record b cord be noticed her ed hereinbelow:- Proceedings in the present cas t case were initiated on the complai plaint of Pawan S an Singh, son of Sukhbir Singh, al h, alleging therein that he (C) had had a poultry farm farm in village Staundi having 2500 25000 birds along with a godown. O n. On 17.1.2025, 025, complainant contacted Sabdar dar and Naved (petitioners herein) ein) to GURBACHAN SINGH 2025.11.01 13:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- -40957-2024 2- -2 sell the de e debris/waster material for a sum sum of Rs.27 lakhs. The petitione ioners gave Rs.5 l s.5 lakhs as security and agreed to d to pay the remaining amount at th at the time when hen the waste material and articles ticles would be lifted. After that, th at, the complainan inant received Rs.12 lakhs in two i wo installments and the accused lifte lifted all the deb debris of the poultry farm and pro promised to pay the amount of Rs f Rs.3 lakhs at th at the time of Eid. However, accus ccused Naved gave him a cheque que of Rs.7 lakhs khs but the said cheque was dishono honoured. On the assurance given b ven by the petition titioners that they would deposit sit the amount in the account, th t, the complainan inant again deposited the cheque wh e which was again dishonoured. On the basis of complaint int and documents collected durin during course of i of investigation, formal case vide F
Legal Reasoning
ide FIR No. 73 dated 6.4.2017, und under Sections 41 s 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B o B of Indian Penal Code, came to b to be registered a red against petitioner. 3. Apprehending their arrest, th est, the petitioners filed an applicatio lication for grant o rant of pre-arrest bail before the lea the learned Additional Sessions Judg s Judge, Karnal, wh , which came to be dismissed in ed in terms of order dated 28.7.202 .2025. Aggrieved ieved of which, the present petition ha tion has been filed. 4.
Legal Reasoning
Learned counsel for the petiti petitioners submits that the petitione titioners have been f been falsely implicated in the present resent case. Civil dispute has been give en given a criminal c minal colour only with a view to haras harass the petitioners as also to extra ract illegal mon al monetary benefits from them. Furth Further, as per learned counsel, even ven if the story as tory as portrayed by complainant is tak t is taken to be true at its face value, th alue, the only allega allegation against the petitioners is ers is that they violated the terms an rms and conditions itions of the contract and did not abid ot abide by the same. Learned couns counsel next submi submits that though custodial interr interrogation of the petitioners is n s is not needed but but they are willing to join the inve he investigation as and when called fo lled for. GURBACHAN SINGH 2025.11.01 13:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- -40957-2024 3- -3 Thus, it ha , it has been prayed that the concessio ncession of interim bail granted to bo to both the petition etitioners be confirmed. 5. Per contra, learned State co tate counsel accompanied by learne learned counsel for sel for the complainant submit that c that custodial interrogation of both th both the petitioners ioners is needed to recover the money money due to the complainant, for bo for both the petition etitioners though agreed to lift debris debris from the poultry farm and pa nd paid initial amo l amount but subsequently did not a not abide by terms of the agreeme reement inasmuch a uch as though they lifted articles bu les but did not pay remaining amoun amount. The ‘dishon ‘dishonest intention’ on the part of th t of the petitioners is apparent from th rom the fact that ch that cheques issued by them were re re returned with the endorsement o ment of “insufficien fficient funds”. On these grounds, nds, both the learned counsel pray fo pray for dismissal o issal of the petition. 6. Heard learned counsel for l for the parties and perused sed the documents ments on record. 7. On 31.7.2025, following order order as passed:- “This is a petition for anticip nticipatory bail under Section 482 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha ksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 in ca case bearing FIR No. 371 dated 25.06.2025 under Sections 318(4 18(4), 316(2), 61 of BNS registere tered at Police Station Gharaund unda, District Karnal. The case of the prosecu osecution is that the complainant ha nt has sold poultry farm articles for for Rs.27 lakhs for which Rs.5 lakh lakhs were paid in advance to the the complainant and the rest of th of the payment was to be made as a as and when the articles were to b to be collected from the poultry try farm. However, the petitioner oners- accused did not make the com complete payment while they lifted th ted the articles and the cheque got dis dishonoured subsequently. Counsel for the petiti titioners submits that Rs.17 lakhs khs in total has been received by by the complainant, however Rs.1 Rs.10 GURBACHAN SINGH 2025.11.01 13:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- -40957-2024 4- -4 lakhs are yet to be receiv ceived. He further states that th at the petitioners are willing and rea ready to join the investigation. Notice of motion for 18. r 18.08.2025. Mr. Tapan Masta, Add Addl. A.G., Haryana, accepts notic notice on behalf of the respondent-St State and states that about 07 to 0 to 08 complaints of similar nature a re are pending against the petitione ioners with the police, however no r no other FIR has been registere stered against them. Mr. Manoj Kumar Taya Taya, Advocate has put in appearanc rance and has filed memorandum um of appearance on behalf of th of the complainant, which is taken on en on record. Learned counsel for th r the State seeks time to file repl reply. May do so positively before th re the next date of hearing with a cop a copy in advance to the learned coun counsel opposite. In the meantime, the p he petitioners are directed to appea ppear before the SHO/Investigating ting Officer as and when called upo upon to join investigation and in th the event of their arrest, they sha shall be released on interim bail o il on their furnishing bail bonds to th to the satisfaction of SHO/Investig estigating Agency, subject to th o the following conditions as envisa nvisaged under Section 482(2) of th of the BNSS [erstwhile Section 438(2 38(2) Cr.P.C.]:- i) that the petitioners shall hall make themselves available fo le for interrogation by a police office officer as and when required; ii) that the petitioners shall no ll not, directly or indirectly, make an ke any inducement, threat or promis omise to any person acquainted wi d with the facts of the case so as to s to dissuade him/her from disclosin losing such facts to the Court or to an to any police officer; iii) that the petitioners shall all not leave India without the prio prior permission of the Court; iv) such other condition as m as may be imposed under sub-sectio ection 3) of Section 480, as if the f the bail were granted under th r that section.” GURBACHAN SINGH 2025.11.01 13:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- -40957-2024 5- -5 8. Learned State counsel, on l, on instructions, submits that th hat the petitioners ioners have joined the investigation. 9. Admittedly, though the amoun amount due to the complainant has n has not been recov recovered, but as has been submit submitted by learned counsel for th for the petitioners, ners, factual matrix reveals that di ed non- dispute stems out of alleged non compliance liance of terms and conditions of th of the business contract. Keeping eping in view the ab the above submissions made by learn y learned counsel for the petitioners a oners as also the fac the fact that the petitioners had joine ned the investigation consequent quent to the order da rder dated 31.7.2025 passed by this Co this Court and there is nothing on recor n record from where where an inference can be drawn that n that they (p) misused this concessio cession accordingly rdingly, interim bail granted vide o vide order dated 31.7.2025 is hereb eby confirmed, irmed, subject to conditions as envisa envisaged under Section 482(2) BNS BNSS. Further, th er, the petitioners are directed to d to join investigation as and whe d when required in ired in further by way of written notice notice for such purpose to be served b rved by the Investi nvestigating Officer of this case upo se upon the petitioners; they will n will not tamper with er with the evidence nor will influenc fluence the witnesses and will not leav ot leave the country ountry without prior permission of the of the Court. 10. The petition stands allowed. .2025 28.10.2025 gbs NEY) (AARADHNA SAWHNEY) JUDGE Whether Speaking/reasoned Whether Reportable : : Yes/No Yes/No GURBACHAN SINGH 2025.11.01 13:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document