Rakesh Kumar Vs State of Haryana — Cheating and Forgery | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

Rakesh Kumar Vs State of Haryana — Cheating and Forgery | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Anticipatory bail in FIR No.157 dated 20.3.2023, P.S. Tosham, District Bhiwani (Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC), subject to furnishing bonds and compliance with the order's conditions (joining investigation within seven days of upload; deemed custody for S.27 Evidence Act/S.23 BSA; statutory bond conditions; no tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses; deemed extension to newly added sections with equal or lower maximum sentence, otherwise seven days' notice; cancellation clause before Sessions Court on commission of a non-bailable offense). All pending applications disposed of.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, apprehending arrest in FIR No.157 dated 20.3.2023 (P.S. Tosham, District Bhiwani) under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC for alleged manipulation of the 'Bhavantar Bharpai Yojana' portal and misappropriation of Government aid of Rs.15,831/-, is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the BNSS.

Court's answer

The matter pertains to 2023 and the police did not arrest the petitioner although arrest was not impossible; the amount involved is Rs.15,831/- and the prosecution has failed to make out a case for custodial interrogation; the analysis does not justify custodial interrogation or pre-trial incarceration.

Ratio / Principle

Coupling the penal provisions invoked with the prima facie analysis of the nature of allegations and factors peculiar to the case, there is no justifiability for custodial interrogation or pre-trial incarceration at this stage, subject to compliance with the terms and conditions of the order; without commenting on merits, the petitioner makes a case for bail, effective from upload on the Court's official webpage.

Key takeaways

General principle stated in passing while deciding the bail question: pre-trial incarceration should not be a replica of post-conviction sentencing.obiter¶25
Provided the petitioner is not required in any other case, he shall be released on anticipatory bail in the FIR subject to furnishing bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer or, if the matter is before a Court, the concerned Court or nearest Ilaqa Magistrate/duty Magistrate; before accepting surety, the Officer/Court must be satisfied the surety can produce the accused if he fails to appear.ratio¶27
Condition of the grant: petitioner directed to join the investigation within seven days of uploading of the order and as and when called by the Investigator; he shall be in deemed custody for Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 / Section 23 of BSA, 2023; he must cooperate at all further stages, failing which prosecution may seek cancellation; during investigation he shall not be subjected to third-degree treatment, indecent language or inhuman treatment.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Punjab & Haryana High Court (Chandigarh), CRM-M-7377-2025 (O&M), decided 07-04-2025 (Anoop Chitkara, J., Oral) — Anticipatory bail under Section 482 BNSS granted to Rakesh Kumar, apprehending arrest in FIR No.157 dated 20.3.2023, P.S. Tosham, District Bhiwani, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC. Allegations (per State reply): manipulation of the 'Bhavantar Bharpai Yojana' Government portal by uploading land details of village Jhulli and procurement of a transfer of Rs.15,831/- to friend Satpal's account via OTP sent on Bajrang's mobile (05.11.2022), the amount thereafter reaching the petitioner through Phone Pay. Held: the matter pertains to 2023 and the police never arrested the petitioner though arrest was not impossible; the amount involved is Rs.15,831/- and the prosecution failed to make out a case for custodial interrogation; pre-trial incarceration should not be a replica of post-conviction sentencing; hence bail, without commenting on merits. Conditions: bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer/Court/Ilaqa Magistrate; joining investigation within seven days of upload, with deemed custody for Section 27 Evidence Act/Section 23 BSA; no tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses; automatic deemed extension to subsequently added sections with equal or lower maximum sentence, otherwise seven days' notice; cancellation before Sessions Court if petitioner commits a non-bailable offense. Petition allowed; pending applications disposed of.

220 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CRM-M-7377-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision : 07-04-2025

Rakesh Kumar

........Petitioner(s)

Versus

State of Haryana

........Respondent(s)

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA

Present: Mr. Keshav Pratap Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Harpreet Kaur, AAG, Haryana.

ANOOP CHITKARA, J. (Oral)

FIR No.	Dated	Police Station	Sections
157	20.3.2023	Tosham, District Bhiwani	420, 467, 468, 471 IPC

The petitioner apprehending arrest in the FIR captioned above has come up before this Court under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, [BNSS], seeking anticipatory bail.

The facts and allegations are being taken from the reply filed by the State, which reads as follows:

“That Brief facts of the case are that on 20.03.2023, complainant Surender presented written complaint that on his and his family member Sandeep's land some other persons have taken the benefit of "Bhavantar Bharpai Yojana" by uploading details of his land and crop details. As per the details, complainant Surender was having land in village Jhuli, falling in Khewat No.97 and 79 and in Khasra No.150 cotton crops had been cultivated and there was insurance of the said crop. However, one lady named Reena used her mobile No.9992483544 to login the "Bhavantar Bharpai Yojana" portal and uploaded the land details of complainant and wrongly mentioned crop of "Bajra" and misappropriated Government aid. On this complaint, FIR was registered under sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC.”

The petitioner's counsel prays for bail by imposing any stringent conditions and contends that pre-trial incarceration would cause an irreversible injustice to the petitioner and their family.

The State’s counsel opposes bail and refers to the reply.

ASHWANI KUMAR 2025.04.10 14:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh

CRM-M-7377-2025

-2-

It would be appropriate to refer to the following portions of the reply, which read as follows:

“11. That the role of the present petitioner is that there are serious allegations of embezzlement of Government money against the present petitioner. It is contended that the present petitioner managed to manipulate the Government portal by his mastermind tactics and himself uploaded details of land of village Jhulli on the online portal and got transferred an amount of Rs.15,831/- in the account of his friend Satpal by sending OTP on mobile No.74049xxxxx of his other friend Bajrang on 05.11.2022 and thereafter, on the same day, Satpal got transferred the aforesaid amount of Rs.15,831/- in the account of the present petitioner through Phone Pay. The name of the present petitioner has come during the investigation. That this is a case of forgery being committed with the Government itself and in this way the present petitioner is not entitle for any relief prayed for.”

REASONING:

The matter pertains to the year 2023 and police did not arrest the petitioner. If the police intended to arrest the petitioner, it was not impossible. Moreover, the amount involved is Rs.15,831/- and prosecution has failed to make out a case for custodial interrogation. Pre-trial incarceration should not be a replica of post-conviction sentencing. The evidence might be prima facie sufficient to launch prosecution or to frame charges, but this Court is not considering the evidence at that stage but is analyzing it for the stage of anticipatory bail. An analysis of the above does not justify custodial interrogation or pre-trial incarceration.

Given the above, the penal provisions invoked coupled with the prima facie analysis of the nature of allegations and the other factors peculiar to this case, there would be no justifiability for custodial interrogation or the pre-trial incarceration at this stage, subject to the compliance of terms and conditions mentioned in this order. Without commenting on the case's merits, in the facts and circumstances peculiar to this case, and for the reasons mentioned above, the petitioner makes a case for bail. This order shall come into force from the time it is uploaded on this Court's official webpage.

Given above, provided the petitioner is not required in any other case, the petitioner shall be released on anticipatory bail in the FIR captioned above subject to furnishing bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer, and if the matter is before a Court, then the concerned Court and due to unavailability before any nearest Ilaqa Magistrate/duty Magistrate. Before accepting the surety, the concerned Officer/Court must be satisfied that if the accused fails to appear, such surety can produce the accused.

While furnishing a personal bond, the petitioner shall mention the following personal identification details:

1. AADHAR number 2. Passport number (If available) and when the attesting officer/court considers it appropriate or considers the accused a flight risk.

ASHWANI KUMAR 2025.04.10 14:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh

CRM-M-7377-2025

-3-

3. Mobile number (If available)

4. E-Mail id (If available)

This order is subject to the petitioner’s complying with the following terms.

The petitioner is directed to join the investigation within seven days of uploading this order on the official webpage of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana and as and when called by the Investigator. The petitioner shall be in deemed custody for Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872/ Section 23 of BSA, 2023. The petitioner shall join the investigation as and when called by the Investigating Officer or any Superior Officer and shall cooperate with the investigation at all further stages as required. In the event of failure to do so, the prosecution will be open to seeking cancellation of the bail. During the investigation, the petitioner shall not be subjected to third-degree, indecent language, inhuman treatment, etc.

The petitioner shall abide by all statutory bond conditions and appear before the concerned Court(s) on all dates. The petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence, influence, browbeat, pressurize, induce, threaten, or promise, directly or indirectly, any witnesses, Police officials, or any other person acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the case or dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Police or the Court.

In case the Investigator/Officer-In-Charge of the concerned Police Station arraigns another section of any penal offense in this FIR, and if the new section prescribes a maximum sentence that is not greater than the sections mentioned above, then this bail order shall be deemed to have also been passed for the newly added section(s). However, suppose the newly inserted sections prescribe a sentence exceeding the maximum sentence prescribed in the sections mentioned above; then, in that case, the Investigator/Officer-In-Charge shall give the petitioner notice of a minimum of seven days, providing an opportunity to avail the remedies available in law.

This bail is conditional, and the foundational condition is that if the petitioner indulges in any non-bailable offense, the State may file an application for cancellation of this bail before the Sessions Court, which shall be at liberty to cancel this bail.

Any observation made hereinabove is neither an expression of opinion on the case's merits nor shall the trial Court advert to these comments.

A certified copy of this order would not be needed for furnishing bonds, and any Advocate for the Petitioner can download this order along with case status from the official web page of this Court and attest it to be a true copy. If the attesting officer wants to verify its authenticity, such an officer can also verify its authenticity and may

ASHWANI KUMAR 2025.04.10 14:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh

CRM-M-7377-2025

-4-

download and use the downloaded copy for attesting bonds.

Petition allowed in terms mentioned above. All pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.

07-04-2025 (ANOOP CHITKARA) AK JUDGE

NOTE: Whether speaking/non-speaking: Speaking

Whether reportable: YES/NO

ASHWANI KUMAR 2025.04.10 14:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh