Punjab-Haryana High Court
Harinder Singh Badesha vs State Of Punjab on 25 March, 2026
CRM-M-12513-2026 1
222 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-12513-2026
Date of decision: 25.03.2026
HARINDER SINGH BADESHA ....Petitioner
Versus
STATE OF PUNJAB ....Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL
Present: Mr. Vipul Babuta, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. Amit Shukla, DAG, Punjab.
****
RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL , J (Oral):
Through the instant petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (For short "BNSS"), the petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in case FIR No.39 dated 26.08.2025 under Sections 419, 420, 120-B of IPC (Sections 465, 467, 468 and 471 IPC and Section 66-D of Information Technology Act, 2000 added later on) (under Section 319(2), 318(4), 61(2), 336(2), 338, 336(3), 340(2) of BNS, 2023) registered at Police Station Cyber Crime, District Police Commissionerate Ludhiana.
2. On 09.03.2026, following order had been passed: -
"Prayer in the present petition filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.39 dated 26.08.2025 registered under Sections 419, 420, 120-B of IPC (Sections 465, 467, 468 and 471 IPC and Section 66-D of Information Technology Act, 2000 MONIKA RANI 2026.03.27 16:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-12513-2026 2 added later on), at Police Station Cyber Crime, District Police Commissionerate Ludhiana.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submitted that the petitioner is merely an employee of the company and owner of the company is Shasha Shubham Gupta. He argued that the petitioner was neither any beneficiary to the alleged fraud as no amount was deposited in his account, nor he demanded or induced the complainant to invest money at any point of time and only allegation against the petitioner is that he introduced the complainant with the said co-accused. He further argued that if the contents of the FIR are taken to be true, even then the dispute in the present case is of civil nature, which has been given criminal colour by registering the present FIR. He further argued that bald and vague allegations have been levelled against the petitioner as the complainant himself admitted the fact that the matter was compromised and an agreement/affidavit dated 21.01.2021 was entered between the complainant and co-accused Shasha Shubham Gupta. He argued that once the dispute was settled between the complainant and co-accused Shasha Shubam Gupta, then present FIR is a mere abuse of process of law. Further, co- accused Satwinder Singh has already been granted the concession of interim bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, vide order dated 02.02.2026. Moreover, the petitioner has clean antecedents as he is not involved in any other case. No recovery is to be effected from the petitioner. Learned counsel has further submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to join the investigation as and when called upon to do so by the investigating agency.MONIKA RANI 2026.03.27 16:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-12513-2026 3
Notice of motion.
On asking of the Court, Mr. Ravinder Singh, DAG, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of respondent- State and seeks time to file status report in the matter. Adjourned to 25.03.2026.
In the meantime, the petitioner is directed to join investigation within a week from today and would appear as and when required by the Investigating Officer and cooperate with the Investigating Agency. In the event of arrest, he shall be admitted to interim bail on furnishing of bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of Arresting/Investigating Officer. The petitioner shall also abide by the conditions as envisaged under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023."
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in compliance of the order dated 09.03.2026 passed by this Court, the petitioner has joined the investigation.
4. Learned counsel for the State, on instructions from SHO Satbir Singh, has submitted that the petitioner has joined the investigation and is no longer required for further investigation.
5. In view of the statement made by learned State counsel, the interim order dated 09.03.2026 is made absolute. The petitioner shall continue 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.
(RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL) JUDGE 25.03.2026 monika 1. Whether speaking/ reasoned : Yes /No
2. Whether reportable : Yes /No MONIKA RANI 2026.03.27 16:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document