RAJINDER KUMAR RAJINDER KUMAR HARYANA STATE OF HARYANA v. …
Case Details
CRM-M-55322 55322-2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH AT CHANDIGARH - -1- 304 CRM CRM-M-55322-2025 Date of decision: 01.12.2025 Date of decision: RAJINDER KUMAR RAJINDER KUMAR HARYANA STATE OF HARYANA Versus ….Petitioner ….Petitioner ....Respondent ....Respondent
Legal Reasoning
Bench has observed that prima facie, it is a case of contractual Bench has observed that prima facie, it is a case of contractual Bench has observed that prima facie, it is a case of contractual Bench has observed that prima facie, it is a case of contractual y can be fastened upon Rajesh obligation and no criminal liability can be fastened upon Rajesh obligation and no criminal liabilit obligation and no criminal liabilit accused Sangeet Kumar has already been Khanna. Further co-accused Sangeet Kumar has already been accused Sangeet Kumar has already been Khanna. Further co granted the concession of anticipatory bail by this Court, vide granted the concession of anticipatory bail by this Court, vide granted the concession of anticipatory bail by this Court, vide granted the concession of anticipatory bail by this Court, vide order dated 14.10.2025. Learned counsel has further submitted order dated 14.10.2025. Learned counsel has further submitted order dated 14.10.2025. Learned counsel has further submitted order dated 14.10.2025. Learned counsel has further submitted o join the investigation as that the petitioner is ready and willing to join the investigation as that the petitioner is ready and willing t that the petitioner is ready and willing t and when called upon to do so by the investigating agency. and when called upon to do so by the investigating agency. and when called upon to do so by the investigating agency. On the other hand, learned State counsel while referring On the other hand, learned State counsel while referring On the other hand, learned State counsel while referring to the status report, has opposed the prayer for grant of to the status report, has opposed the prayer for grant of to the status report, has opposed the prayer for grant of to the status report, has opposed the prayer for grant of levelled anticipatory bail, by submitting that the allegations levelled anticipatory bail, by submitting that the allegations anticipatory bail, by submitting that the allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature. He further submitted against the petitioner are serious in nature. He further submitted against the petitioner are serious in nature. He further submitted against the petitioner are serious in nature. He further submitted that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required as that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required as that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required as that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required as recoveries of firm related records is yet to be made. recoveries of firm related records is yet to be made. recoveries of firm related records is yet to be made. Learned counsel for the complainant, while opposing the Learned counsel for the complainant, while opposing the Learned counsel for the complainant, while opposing the tion for anticipatory bail, has contended that the case of the petition for anticipatory bail, has contended that the case of the tion for anticipatory bail, has contended that the case of the peti accused as he is an petitioner is not on parity with other co-accused as he is an petitioner is not on parity with other co petitioner is not on parity with other co approver in the present case and an approver is not entitled for approver in the present case and an approver is not entitled for approver in the present case and an approver is not entitled for approver in the present case and an approver is not entitled for anticipatory bail till termination of trial as per Section 343 of anticipatory bail till termination of trial as per Section 343 of anticipatory bail till termination of trial as per Section 343 of anticipatory bail till termination of trial as per Section 343 of BNSS (Section 306 of erstwhile Cr.P.C.). On merits, he BNSS (Section 306 of erstwhile Cr.P.C.). On merits, he BNSS (Section 306 of erstwhile Cr.P.C.). On merits, he BNSS (Section 306 of erstwhile Cr.P.C.). On merits, he contended that the present petitioner is not entitled for bail as he contended that the present petitioner is not entitled for bail as he contended that the present petitioner is not entitled for bail as he contended that the present petitioner is not entitled for bail as he accused had caused financial loss to the along with other co-accused had caused financial loss to the accused had caused financial loss to the along with other co complainant. complainant. On a specific query put by the Court to learned State On a specific query put by the Court to learned State On a specific query put by the Court to learned State sel as to whether the present petitioner is an approver in the counsel as to whether the present petitioner is an approver in the sel as to whether the present petitioner is an approver in the coun GURPREET 2025.12.04 16:03 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document. CRM-M-55322 55322-2025 - -4- present FIR, the State counsel replied that as per the status present FIR, the State counsel replied that as per the status present FIR, the State counsel replied that as per the status present FIR, the State counsel replied that as per the status report submitted, the present petitioner is not an approver. report submitted, the present petitioner is not an approver. report submitted, the present petitioner is not an approver. List on 29.11.2025. an approver in the Be that as it may, since petitioner is not an approver in the Be that as it may, since petitioner is not present case and no pardon has been granted to him as per present case and no pardon has been granted to him as per present case and no pardon has been granted to him as per present case and no pardon has been granted to him as per Section 343 of BNSS, there is no bar in extending the benefit of Section 343 of BNSS, there is no bar in extending the benefit of Section 343 of BNSS, there is no bar in extending the benefit of Section 343 of BNSS, there is no bar in extending the benefit of anticipatory bail to him keeping in view the circumstances of this anticipatory bail to him keeping in view the circumstances of this anticipatory bail to him keeping in view the circumstances of this anticipatory bail to him keeping in view the circumstances of this case and the fact that other co-accused have e case and the fact that other co ither been granted accused have either been granted the benefit of anticipatory or regular bail. Accordingly, the the benefit of anticipatory or regular bail. Accordingly, the the benefit of anticipatory or regular bail. Accordingly, the the benefit of anticipatory or regular bail. Accordingly, the present petitioner is directed to join investigation within a week present petitioner is directed to join investigation within a week present petitioner is directed to join investigation within a week present petitioner is directed to join investigation within a week from today and would appear as and when required by the from today and would appear as and when required by the from today and would appear as and when required by the from today and would appear as and when required by the gating Investigating Officer and cooperate with the Investigating Investigating Officer and cooperate with the Investi Investigating Officer and cooperate with the Investi Agency. In the event of arrest, he shall be admitted to interim Agency. In the event of arrest, he shall be admitted to interim Agency. In the event of arrest, he shall be admitted to interim Agency. In the event of arrest, he shall be admitted to interim bail on furnishing of bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of bail on furnishing of bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of bail on furnishing of bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of bail on furnishing of bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of Arresting/Investigating Officer. The petitioner shall also abide Arresting/Investigating Officer. The petitioner shall also abide Arresting/Investigating Officer. The petitioner shall also abide Arresting/Investigating Officer. The petitioner shall also abide SS, by the conditions as envisaged under Section 482(2) of BNSS, by the conditions as envisaged under Section 482(2) of BN by the conditions as envisaged under Section 482(2) of BN 2023.” 2023. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in compliance of Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in compliance of Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in compliance of Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in compliance of .2025 passed by this Court, the petitioner has joined the the order dated 12.11.2025 passed by this Court, the petitioner has joined the .2025 passed by this Court, the petitioner has joined the the order dated investigation. investigation. 4. Learned counsel for the State, on instructions from ASI Learned counsel for the Abhay State, on instructions from ASI Abhay submitted that the petitioner has joined the investigation and is no Ram, has submitted that the petitioner has joined the investigation and is no submitted that the petitioner has joined the investigation and is no submitted that the petitioner has joined the investigation and is no longer required for further investigation. longer required for further investigation. 5. In view of the statement made by learned State counsel, the In view of the statement made by learned State counsel, the In view of the statement made by learned State counsel, the In view of the statement made by learned State counsel, the .2025 is made absolute. The petitioner shall continue interim order dated 12.11.2025 is made absolute. The petitioner shall continue .2025 is made absolute. The petitioner shall continue interim order dated to join investigation, as and when called by the Investigating Officer and shall to join investigation, as and when called by the Investigating Officer and shall to join investigation, as and when called by the Investigating Officer and shall to join investigation, as and when called by the Investigating Officer and shall also abide by the conditions as provided under Section 482(2) of the BNSS. also abide by the conditions as provided under Section 482(2) of the BNSS. also abide by the conditions as provided under Section 482(2) of the BNSS. also abide by the conditions as provided under Section 482(2) of the BNSS. 01.12.2025 Gurpreet GURPREET 2025.12.04 16:03 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document. i) Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No i) Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No ii) Whether reportable? Yes/No (RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL) (RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL) JUDGE
Arguments
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL CORAM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL Present:- Mr. Aditya Sanghi, Advocate and Mr. Aditya Sanghi, Advocate and Mr. Sandeep Vashisth, Advocate, Mr. Sandeep Vashisth, Advocate, Mr. Sandeep Vashisth, Advocate, for the petitioner. for the petitioner. Mr. Mohit Chaudhary, AAG, Haryana. Mr. Mohit Chaudhary, AAG, Haryana. Mr. Mohit Chaudhary, AAG, Haryana. Ms. Suresh Rani, Advocate for M Mr. G. S. Sidhu, Advocate, Mr. G. S. Sidhu, Advocate, for the complainant. for the ***** RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL, J. (ORAL) RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL, J. (ORAL) 1. Through the instant petition filed under Section 482 of the Through the instant petition filed under Section 482 of the Through the instant petition filed under Section 482 of the Through the instant petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (For short “BNSS”), the petitioner Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (For short “BNSS”), the petitioner Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (For short “BNSS”), the petitioner Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (For short “BNSS”), the petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in case FIR No.298 dated 08.08.2024 regis seeks anticipatory bail in case tered under FIR No.298 dated 08.08.2024 registered under Sections 318(2), 316(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections Sections 318(2), 316(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections Sections 318(2), 316(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections Sections 318(2), 316(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections B of IPC, at Police Station Sirsa Sadar, 406, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B of IPC, at Police Station Sirsa Sadar, B of IPC, at Police Station Sirsa Sadar, 406, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120 District Sirsa. 2. On 12.11.2025, following order had been passed: On .2025, following order had been passed: - Prayer in the present petition filed under Section 482 of the “Prayer in the present petition filed under Section 482 of the Prayer in the present petition filed under Section 482 of the “ BNSS, 2023 is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in BNSS, 2023 is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in BNSS, 2023 is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in BNSS, 2023 is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.298 dated 08.08.2024 registered under Sections case FIR No.298 dated 08.08.2024 registered under Sections case FIR No.298 dated 08.08.2024 registered under Sections case FIR No.298 dated 08.08.2024 registered under Sections 318(2), 316(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and 318(2), 316(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and 318(2), 316(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and GURPREET 2025.12.04 16:03 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document. CRM-M-55322 55322-2025 - -2- Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120 Sections B of IPC, at Police 406, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B of IPC, at Police Station Sirsa Sadar, District Sirsa. Station Sirsa Sadar, District Sirsa. Station Sirsa Sadar, District Sirsa. Status report has already been filed by learned State Status report has already been filed by learned State Status report has already been filed by learned State counsel. counsel. Brief facts as per the prosecution case are that one Sanjay Brief facts as per the prosecution case are that one Sanjay Brief facts as per the prosecution case are that one Sanjay na, who is proprietor Jain filed a complaint against Rajesh Khanna, who is proprietor Jain filed a complaint against Rajesh Khan Jain filed a complaint against Rajesh Khan of the firm Shiv Traders alleging that said Rajesh Khanna had of the firm Shiv Traders alleging that said Rajesh Khanna had of the firm Shiv Traders alleging that said Rajesh Khanna had of the firm Shiv Traders alleging that said Rajesh Khanna had approached the complainant with a proposal to start a rice mill approached the complainant with a proposal to start a rice mill approached the complainant with a proposal to start a rice mill approached the complainant with a proposal to start a rice mill in August 2022 and allured him to invest in the same. Rajesh in August 2022 and allured him to invest in the same. Rajesh in August 2022 and allured him to invest in the same. Rajesh in August 2022 and allured him to invest in the same. Rajesh accused in Khanna introduced the complainant with other co-accused in Khanna introduced the complainant with other co Khanna introduced the complainant with other co connection with the said mill and all the three accused under connection with the said mill and all the three accused under connection with the said mill and all the three accused under connection with the said mill and all the three accused under well planned conspiracy caused financial and mental harm to the well planned conspiracy caused financial and mental harm to the well planned conspiracy caused financial and mental harm to the well planned conspiracy caused financial and mental harm to the complainant to unjustly enrich themselves. complainant to unjustly enrich themselves. complainant to unjustly enrich themselves. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the lsely implicated in the present case which petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case which lsely implicated in the present case which petitioner has been fa essentially arose out of financial dispute concerning essentially arose out of financial dispute concerning essentially arose out of financial dispute concerning essentially arose out of financial dispute concerning rendition/settlement of accounts between complainant Sanjay rendition/settlement of accounts between complainant Sanjay rendition/settlement of accounts between complainant Sanjay rendition/settlement of accounts between complainant Sanjay accused Rajesh Khanna who were admittedly Jain and co-accused Rajesh Khanna who were admittedly accused Rajesh Khanna who were admittedly Jain and co He further business partners in M/s Mahalaxmi Rice Mill. He further business partners in M/s Mahalaxmi Rice Mill. business partners in M/s Mahalaxmi Rice Mill. contends that neither the petitioner was named in the FIR nor contends that neither the petitioner was named in the FIR nor contends that neither the petitioner was named in the FIR nor contends that neither the petitioner was named in the FIR nor has any concern with the said offence. He argued that the only has any concern with the said offence. He argued that the only has any concern with the said offence. He argued that the only has any concern with the said offence. He argued that the only asking of Rajesh allegation against the petitioner is that he on asking of Rajesh allegation against the petitioner is that he on allegation against the petitioner is that he on Khanna, issued fake bills amounting to Rs.27 crores in favour of Khanna, issued fake bills amounting to Rs.27 crores in favour of Khanna, issued fake bills amounting to Rs.27 crores in favour of Khanna, issued fake bills amounting to Rs.27 crores in favour of Shiv Traders. He further argued that the present petitioner Shiv Traders. He further argued that the present petitioner Shiv Traders. He further argued that the present petitioner Shiv Traders. He further argued that the present petitioner consistently maintained before the investigating agency and in consistently maintained before the investigating agency and in consistently maintained before the investigating agency and in consistently maintained before the investigating agency and in tion 183 of his voluntary judicial statement recorded under Section 183 of his voluntary judicial statement recorded under Sec his voluntary judicial statement recorded under Sec BNSS that he never sold rice to Shiv Traders and his firm’s name BNSS that he never sold rice to Shiv Traders and his firm’s name BNSS that he never sold rice to Shiv Traders and his firm’s name BNSS that he never sold rice to Shiv Traders and his firm’s name was merely used for billing purpose. He further argued that this was merely used for billing purpose. He further argued that this was merely used for billing purpose. He further argued that this was merely used for billing purpose. He further argued that this voluntary statement of the petitioner stand in position of voluntary statement of the petitioner stand in position of voluntary statement of the petitioner stand in position of voluntary statement of the petitioner stand in position of us prosecution witness, who has candidly disclosed the modus prosecution witness, who has candidly disclosed the mod prosecution witness, who has candidly disclosed the mod operandi of the principal accused and not that of an accused operandi of the principal accused and not that of an accused operandi of the principal accused and not that of an accused operandi of the principal accused and not that of an accused himself. He further argued that the main accused Rajesh Khanna himself. He further argued that the main accused Rajesh Khanna himself. He further argued that the main accused Rajesh Khanna himself. He further argued that the main accused Rajesh Khanna accused i.e. Kanta Khanna, Mohammad Shakib, and other co-accused i.e. Kanta Khanna, Mohammad Shakib, accused i.e. Kanta Khanna, Mohammad Shakib, and other co GURPREET 2025.12.04 16:03 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document. CRM-M-55322 55322-2025 - -3- Prem Bajaj and Rohan have been granted anticipatory bail by a Prem Bajaj and Rohan have been granted anticipatory bail by a Prem Bajaj and Rohan have been granted anticipatory bail by a Prem Bajaj and Rohan have been granted anticipatory bail by a dinate Bench of this Court and Rajesh Kumar @ Raju and Co-ordinate Bench of this Court and Rajesh Kumar @ Raju and dinate Bench of this Court and Rajesh Kumar @ Raju and Co Balwinder Khanna have also been granted the concession of Balwinder Khanna have also been granted the concession of Balwinder Khanna have also been granted the concession of Balwinder Khanna have also been granted the concession of ordinate Bench of this Court. He further regular bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court. He further ordinate Bench of this Court. He further regular bail by a Co accued Ashwani Kumar, Ashish Phutela, Sandeep argued that co-accued Ashwani Kumar, Ashish Phutela, Sandeep accued Ashwani Kumar, Ashish Phutela, Sandeep argued that co balpreet Singh have been granted Kumar, Devraj and Babalpreet Singh have been granted balpreet Singh have been granted Kumar, Devraj and Ba anticipatory bail by the trial Court. He argued that while anticipatory bail by the trial Court. He argued that while anticipatory bail by the trial Court. He argued that while anticipatory bail by the trial Court. He argued that while ordinate deciding the anticiaptory bail of main accused, the Co-ordinate deciding the anticiaptory bail of main accused, the Co deciding the anticiaptory bail of main accused, the Co