CRM-M/31351/2026 of KARAM CHAND Vs STATE OF HARYANA on 3 September 2026

1. CR Karam Ch State of H

2. CR Priyanshu State of H

Date of d Date of U

CORAM

Present:

SUMEET

1. disposed o

2026 title

2. 482 of concessio under Sec District A are father

THE HIGH COURT OF PUN CHANDIG ses) RM-M-31351-2026 hand

V/s Haryana and another RM-M-33165-2026 u Sharma alias Prince V/s Haryana and another decision: 03.09.2026 Uploading : 03.09.2026 M: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE Mr. Kanwar Abhay Singh, A (in both the petitions). Mr. Gurmeet Singh, AAG Ha Mr. Navjit Singh, Advocate f (in both the petitions). ***** T GOEL, J. (Oral) By this common order, the of together, as they emanate from For brevity, the facts are b d as Karam Chand vs. State of H The aforesaid present petitio the Bharatiya Nagarik Surak on of anticipatory bail in FIR N ctions 120-B, 406, 420 and 506 Ambala. The petitioners (in the and son, respectively.

NJAB AND HARYANA AT ARH

....Petitioner

....Respondents

....Petitioner

....Respondents SUMEET GOEL Advocate for the petitioner aryana. for respondent No.2 aforesaid two petitions are bei m the same FIR. being taken from CRM-M-3135 Haryana and another. ons have been filed under Secti ksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking No. 43 dated 22.04.2026 register 6 of IPC at Police Station Nagg aforesaid two connected petitio

ing ion the red gal, on) AJAY KUMAR

CRM-M- CRM-M-

3. the comp resident o Chand an the pretex Verse’ an customers over appr during S transferre complaina the petitio from the doubled. T the amou consequen registered

4. iterated th question. civil in na contended agent, rep to exert p petitioner

The gravamen of the allegati plainant namely Rameshwar Si of village Panjola, District Am nd his son Priyanshu Sharma ali xt that they were associated wit nd the said company would d

s. Believing their representation, roximately ₹3 lakh in cash to t eptember 2023. Apart from d on 05.09.2023 and another ant to the bank account of petitio oner(s) (herein) had grabbed tota complainant on their representa The complainant has further alle nt was not returned to him & h nces. On these set of allegation d and investigation ensued. Learned counsel appearing hat the petitioner has been fa Learned counsel has further iter ature which has been given a cr d that the petitioner himself wa presentative or employee and the pressure on the petitioner. It ha r has received returns from the ions relates to an incident where ingh, who is an agriculturist a mbala, has been duped by Kar ias Prince (petitioner(s) herein) th a company known as ‘The S double the money invested by , the complainant allegedly hand the petitioner(s) in small amou the cash amount, ₹2 lakh w r ₹1 lakh on 11.09.2023 by oner Karam Chand. In this mann al amount of approximately ₹6 la ation that his investment would eged that despite repeated deman he was, in fact, threatened of d ns, the FIR in question came to for petitioner - Karam Chand h alsely implicated into the FIR rated that the dispute is essentia riminal colour. It has been furth as merely an investor and not e present FIR has been lodged on as been further contended that platform and, because of his o

eby and ram on Soil its ded unts was the ner, akh be nds, dire be has in ally her its nly the wn AJAY KUMAR

CRM-M- CRM-M-

experienc According has subse dishonest criminal b It has bee 2023 whe which cas has furthe warranted furnish an amount i abscondin evidence, submissio

4.1. learned co Karam C substantia iterated th received a was trans counsel, questions has been ce, some persons from his s g to learned counsel, the compla quently reinvested in the platform intention from the inception breach of trust is made out in the en further contended that the al ereas the FIR has been registere sts serious doubt on the veracity er submitted that the custodial in d as the petitioner, in order to ny security or bank guarantee or n dispute. Moreover, there i ng from the process of justice o in case, he is enlarged on pre ons, the grant of anticipatory bail In respect of petitioner –– ounsel has adopted the submissi hand and submits that the alle ally based upon the same tra hat there has been no materia any part of the money of the co sferred went into the account o the allegations are unsubstan of fact which can only be adjud further submitted that no incrim ocial circle also invested in ainant has also received returns a m and, therefore, there has been and no offence of cheating e factual milieu of the case in han lleged offence pertains to the y ed after a delay of about 03 ye of the allegations. Learned coun nterrogation of the petitioner is n show his bona fide, is ready any fixed deposit equivalent to s no likelihood of the petition or tampering with the prosecuti e-arrest bail. On strength of the l is entreated for.

– Priyanshu Sharma alias Prin ions made on behalf of petitione egations against the petitioner ansactions. Learned counsel h al to show that the petitioner h omplainant and the amount wh f his father. According to learn ntiated and based upon dispu dicated during the course of trial minating recovery is to be effec

it. and no or nd. ear ears nsel not to the ner ion ese nce, er - are has has ich ned ted

l. It ted AJAY KUMAR

CRM-M- CRM-M-

from the p which are petitioner no justific the petitio prosecutio

5. petitions dispute b According statement independe investmen its agents Learned S material s extent of investigat the materi

5.1. submissio and has pr

6. gone throu petitioner and the entire case is e already in possession of the inv r has already appeared before the cation for his custodial interrogat oner absconding from the proce on evidence, the grant of anticipa In oppugnation, learned S on the ground that matter is no but an alleged financial fraud g to learned state counsel, the in ts of Nirmal Singh and Balk ently attributed an active role nts in the company ‘The Soil Ve s and by promising that the inv State counsel has emphasized stage and several aspects, includ f the alleged fraud & the role ted. In view of the seriousness o ial collected, it is prayed that bot Learned counsel appearing on in tandem with the contentio rayed for the dismissal of both th I have heard the learned cou ugh the available record of the c based upon documentary eviden vestigating agency. Moreover, e investigating agency and there tion. Since there is no likelihood ss of justice or tampering with atory bail is entreated for. State counsel has opposed bo ot a simple private or commerc involving more than one victi nvestigation has brought on reco kar Singh, both of whom ha to the petitioners in canvassi erse’ by representing themselves vested amount would be doubl that the investigation is still a ding the complete money trail, e of other persons, remain to of the allegations and the nature th the petitions be dismissed. for respondent No.2 has rais ons raised by learned State coun he petition(s) in hand. unsel for the rival parties and ha case.

nce the e is d of the oth cial im. ord ave ing s as ed. at a the be e of sed nsel ave AJAY KUMAR

CRM-M- CRM-M-

7. material p grave and petitioner representi amount w from him the transf Karam C investigat their mon with the purely civ concessio facie offe and the material c made dire brushed a Karam C report, co company advertisin of the amo

As per the case put forth in placed on record, the allegation d specific. In the instant case, th r(s) to invest some amount in t ing themselves as its agents an would be doubled and thereafter . During the course of investiga fer of Rs.2 lakh and Rs.1 lakh i Chand. As per the material tion, it transpires that two other ney on the allurement of the pet allegations of a similar nature. vil in nature does not, at this stag on of anticipatory bail to the pet ence(s) of cheating, forgery and allegations disclose commissio collected during investigation, pa ectly into the account of petiti aside at this stage. Furthermore hand recorded during investiga ontains material admissions re ‘The Soil Verse’, the involv ng the company, the conversation ounts in his account, which cann n the FIR in question as also ns against both the petitioners he complainant was allured by the company ‘The Soil Verse’ nd by promising that the inves obtained approximately ₹6.00 la ation, the bank records corrobor into the account of the petitione collected during the course r witnesses, who had also inves itioner(s), have also come forwa The contention that the matter ge, persuade this Court to grant titioner(s) particularly when pri criminal conspiracy are made o on of cognizable offences. T articularly the bank transfers bei ioner – Karam Chand, cannot , the statement of the petitione ation, as reproduced in the sta egarding his association with vement of his son Priyanshu n with the complainant and rece not be ignored at this stage.

the are the by ted acs rate er - of ted ard r is the ma out The ing be r – atus the in eipt AJAY KUMAR

CRM-M- CRM-M-

8. Chand ha dated 27.0 ₹6.00 lacs Priyanshu action be However, right in fa protection the Court investigat investigat has to be time of fin

record be protection progresse Though th recovery o full netwo role of the The pros induceme

It would be apt to mention h ad been granted the concession 05.2026 by this Court and he wa s in favour of complainant. Sim u Sharma alias Prince, this Co e taken against him during th , such interim protection does n avour of either petitioner for con n is ordinarily granted to safegu t is able to consider the matter a ting agency and examining t tion. The final decision on the p taken on the basis of the materi nal adjudication. In the present case, the mate efore this Court is of considerab n granted to petitioner –– Kar d and statements of other alle he petitioner – Karam Chand h of the cheated amount is still pen ork of alleged fraud/investment e other co-accused of “The Soil secution has also brought on ent involving other persons.

herein that the petitioner –– Kar n of interim protection vide ord as directed to bring a demand dr milarly, in the case of petitioner urt had directed that no coerc he pendency of the proceedin not vest or create any indefeasi nfirmation of the said order. Inter uard the liberty of an accused un after obtaining the response of the subsequent developments prayer for grant of anticipatory b al available before the Court at rial which has now been placed ble significance. After the inter ram Chand, the investigation h eged victims have been record has joined the investigation but nding and the investigation into scheme, including the identity a l Verse” company is still going o n record allegations of simi

ram der raft –– ive ngs. ble rim ntil the in bail the on rim has ded. the the and on. ilar AJAY KUMAR

CRM-M- CRM-M-

concerned granting h the FIR it promising Nirmal S participati Karam Ch

9. stage, fro falsely im while con equilibrat interests. offence; investigat on the so prima fac which has a reasona anticipato impedime SCC 187 (SCC p. 1

As regard petitioner Priy d, the material which is availab him the concession of anticipat tself and the complainant attribu g doubling of the investment. T Singh and Balkar Singh have ion of the petitioner Priyanshu hand in promoting ‘The Soil Ver Moreover, no cause nay plau om which it can be deciphered mplicated into the present FIR. I nsidering a plea for grant of a te between safeguarding individ The Court ought to reckon with the role attributed to the accu tion as also the deeper and wide ociety. At this stage, there is n cie case is not made out again s come on record and preliminar able basis for the accusations. T ory bail to the petitioner(s), ent in effective investigation. In : 1997 SCC (Cri) 1039, the Hon 189, para 6) “6. We find force in the submissi qualitatively more elicitation-orie yanshu Sharma alias Prince ble on record also does not just tory bail. His name also figures utes to him the allegation regardi The statements of other victims also specifically referred to u Sharma alias Prince along w rse’ and inducing persons to inve usible cause has been shown, at t d that the petitioner(s) have be It is befitting to mention here t anticipatory bail, the Court has dual rights and protecting socie h the magnitude and nature of used; the need for fair and f er impact of such alleged iniquit no material on record to hold t nst the petitioner(s). The mater ry investigation, appear to establ Thus, it is not appropriate to gr as it would necessarily cau n State v. Anil Sharma, (1997) n'ble Supreme Court held as unde ion of CBI that custodial interrogation ented than questioning a suspect who

is tify s in ing i.e. the with est. this een hat to etal the free ties hat rial lish ant use

7) 7 er : n is o is AJAY KUMAR

CRM-M- CRM-M-

10. offence a thorough petitioner milieu of

11.

(i) dismissed

(ii) of opinion

(iii) Septembe Ajay well-ensconced with a favourable a case like this, effective inter tremendous advantage in disinter materials which would have interrogation would elude if the protected and insulated by a pre interrogated. Very often interroga a mere ritual. The argument tha with the danger of the person b need not be countenanced, for, su accused in all criminal cases. Th police officers would conduct th would not conduct themselves as o In view of the gravity of t and the requirement of the cust investigation, this Court is of r(s) do not deserve the concessio the case in hand. In view of the prevenient rati Both the petition(s) are d d. Nothing said hereinabove sh n upon merits of the case/investig Pending application(s), if any

er 03, 2026 Whether speaking/reasoned: Whether reportable:

e order under Section 438 of the Code rrogation of a suspected person is rring many useful informations and a been concealed. Success in s suspected person knows that he is w e-arrest bail order during the time he ation in such a condition would reduce at the custodial interrogation is frau being subjected to third-degree meth uch an argument can be advanced by he Court has to presume that responsi hemselves in task of disintering offen offenders.” the allegations, the nature of todial interrogation for a fair a f the considered opinion that on of anticipatory bail in the fact iocination, it is ordained thus: evoid of merits and are here hall be deemed to be an expressi gation. y, shall also stand disposed off. (SUMEET GOEL)

JUDGE

Yes/No

Yes/No

e. In s of also uch well e is e to ught ods y all ible nces the and the ual eby ion AJAY KUMAR