Punjab-Haryana High Court
Harsh Yadav vs State Of Punjab on 5 August, 2024
Author: Sandeep Moudgil
Bench: Sandeep Moudgil
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:099976
CRM-M-4802-2024 1
210
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-4802-2024 (O&M)
DATE OF DECISION: 05.08.2024
HARSH YADAV ...PETITIONER
Versus
STATE OF PUNJAB ... RESPONDENT
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MOUDGIL
Present: Mr. GPS Ghuman, Advocate and
Mr. Atul Kumar, Advocate for the petitioner(s).
Mr. J.S. Rattu, DAG, Punjab.
Mr. Abhishek Shah, Advocate for the complainant.
***
SANDEEP MOUDGIL, J (ORAL)
1. Relief Sought
The jurisdiction of this Court under Section 439 Cr.P.C., has
been invoked for the grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR
No. 0072, dated 04.08.2023, under Sections 420/465/467/468/471 IPC,
1860 and Section 66(D) of Information Technology Act, 2000 registered
at Police Station Jodhewal, District Police Commissionerate, Ludhiana.
2. Prosecution story set up in the present case as per the
version in the FIR read as under :-
'At this time application PGD No.
198067/201171 dated 18-7-2023 from Davinder Singh son of
Baldev Singh resident of House No. 14-15, Green City Tharike
Ludhiana, was received through Post for registration of FIR in the
office of Commissioner Police Ludhiana. The contents of the
application is as under, Sir, Commissioner of Police, Ludhiana.
Subject: Misappropriation of Funds by the Company. I, Davinder
Singh Sindhu Director M/S Davinder Sandhu Impex Pvt.Ltd.
Gehlewal am giving complaint against HR Harsh Yadav of our
1 of 11
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:099976
company, who was working for the last two years, whose job
included making the salary of the laborers and depositing the
salary in their account was his work. HR Yadav by opening the
fake account of the company misused the money of the company
This person ran away from his house along with his family from
17-7-2023 and all his mobile phones have been switched off.
Please seal his bank account and help us in tracing him. Yours
sincerely Sd/- Davinder Singh Sidhu for Davinder Sandhu Impex
Pvt. Ltd. It is requested that the said application be got
investigated by Assistant Commissioner of Police P.B.I Economic
Offence and Cyber Crimes, Ludhiana. According to the
investigation report, the said application was submitted by
Davinder Singh son of Baldev Singh resident of House No. 14-15,
Green City, Tharike, Ludhiana, by the HR of his firm Harsh Yadav,
for taking legal action regarding committing fraud. During the
investigation by joining applicant Davinder Singh in the inquiry
statement as recorded. Who recorded in his statement that from the
year 2021 Harsh Yadav son of Mal Singh resident of House No.
54, Jain Colony, Bhamia Road, Ludhiana, was working as HR in
our company. Who used to make the salary of the employees
working in the company after getting audited by the Production
Managers of the company. I used to sign the bills prepared by
Harsh Yadav, on believing him. After that the bill by sending in the
State Bank of India Branch Sunder Nagar, Ludhiana, the money
was transferred to the accounts of all the employees of the
company. That now, I have to know that after conducting an audit
from Harsh Yadav from Production Managers, Harsh Yadav again
put the fake bank accounts opened by him in a fake list and again
prepared bills from me with the fake signature of the production
manager has been signing. So far Harsh Yadav has put the details
of his fake accounts in the list have defrauded me by fraudulently
obtaining a total of Rs. 1,22,33000/-. Regarding which I am
submitting a copy of the detailed information. Apart from this I
also want to mention that Harsh Yadav has also prepared his fake
Aadhaar cards. Whose photocopy I also submitted before you.
Therefore an appropriate legal action be taken against Harsh
2 of 11
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:099976
Yadav and I be provided justice. For joining Harsh Yadav in the
investigation a summon was sent to his house No.54, Jain Colony,
Bhamia Road, Ludhiana and on rented house No.19, Street No.03,
Chandigarh Road, GTB Nagar, Mundian Kalan, Ludhiana. Where
Mita Sharma stated that Harsh Yadav has sold the house no.54,
Jain Colony, Bhamian Road, Ludhiana to her at about 4 years
ago. After going to Harsh Yadav's rented house No.19, Street No.
03, Chandigarh Road, GTB Nagar, Mundian Kalan, Ludhiana,
where the person present told that 4-5 days ago, Harsh Yadav had
gone somewhere from his house along with his family. Apart from
this, Harsh Yadav's mobile numbers 83604-94708 and 70878-
21092 were also contacted. Which are coming switched off. From
which it is clear that Harsh Yadav after defrauded Davinder Singh
deliberately gone somewhere. Due to which it is not possible to
join Harsh Yadav in the investigation. During the investigation,
the application submitted by Davinder Singh of his firm Davinder
Sandhu Impex Pvt. Ltd. SBI Bank Account No. 10202393134 and
SBI Bank Account No.10202386252, from the perusal of the
statement, it is found that from the accounts of applicant Davinder
Singh's firm Davinder Sandhu Impex Pvt Ltd. from Kotak Bank to
account No. 0045340314, 2545793911, 874623857, 3847038151,
3847038168, 5747220285, 5747220278 5747165692, Bank
H.D.F.C. the in and Account No.50100317367719 and
50200074966285 and Fino ank and No.20257723743 Account
account No.20025707343 total Rs. 1,22,33,000/- have been found
transferred. Regarding which the record was obtained from Kotak
Bank, H.D.F.C Bank and Fino Bank, which is also enclosed.
During the investigation, records were obtained regarding Kotak
Bank account numbers 0045340314, 2545793911, 874623857,
3847038151, 3847038168, 5747220278 5747165692, and
5747220285. Which as per record is registered in the account
number 0045340314 of Harsh Yadav resident of house number 54,
Bhamian Road, Jain Colony, Ludhiana, mobile number 76962-
10611 and gmail I.D. registered
with [email protected]. Account No. 2545793911 is
registered in the name of Rajwant Kaur Resident of Street No.2,
3 of 11
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:099976
Chandigarh Road, Near Rekhi Ram Sons, Ludhiana, with Mobile
No. 98776-55689. Account No. 8746238527 is registered in the
name of Balwinder Kaur resident of G-7, Guru Nanak Dev Nagar,
Ludhiana with mobile No. 83604-94708 and G-mail Id
Harsh [email protected]. Account No. 3847038151 is
registered in the name of Savinder Kaur resident of G- 7, Guru
Nanak Dev Nagar, Ludhiana with mobile No. 99150-10640 and G-
mail Id [email protected]. Account No.3847038151 is
registered in the name of Maya R/o G-7, Guru Nanak Nagar,
Ludhiana, with mobile No.97818-10611. Account number
5747165692 is registered in the name of Simranjit Kaur, resident
of G-7, Guru Nanak Dev Nagar, Ludhiana, with mobile number
99885-50618. Account number 5747220278 is registered in the
name of Kulwinder Kaur resident of G-7, Guru Nanak Dev Nagar,
Ludhiana, with mobile number 95017-01720. Account number
5747220285 is registered in the na deme of Jasveer Kaur resident
of G-7, Guru Nanak Dev Nagar, Ludhiana, with mobile number
84270-54217. That record of the above attached mobile numbers
76962- 10611, 98776-55689, 83604-94708, 99150-10640, 97818-
10611, 99885-50618, 95017-01720 and mobile No.84270-54217
with banks were obtained. That according to record mobile
No.76962-10611, 83604- 94708 and 97818-10611 is registered in
the name of Harsh Yadam son of Mal Singh resident of H ouse
No.54, Jain Colony, Bhamian Road, Ludhiana. Mobile number
98776-55689 is registered in the name of Ramandeep Singh son of
Pradeep Singh resident of House No.97, Street No. 2, Mundian
Kalan, New Guru Nanak Nagar, 33 Foota Road, Ludhiana.
Mobile number 99150-10640 is registered in the name of
Davinder Sandhu's firm. Regarding which Davinder Sandhu's firm
submitted the authority letter that mobile number 99150-10640
was issued to Harsh Yadav working in their firm. Mobile No.
84270-54217 is registered in the name of Vishal Singh son of
Sandeep Singh resident of House No. 3750, Street No.15, Ward
No.19, New Madhopuri, Ludhiana. Apart from this, the records of
mobile numbers 99885-50618 and 95017-01720 have not been
obtained. During the investigation, records regarding these
4 of 11
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:099976
numbers should be obtained and action be taken as per the law.
During the investigation of HDFC account number
50100317367719 and 50200074966285 the record was obtained
from the HDFC bank. According to record the account number
50100317367719 is registered in the name of Harsh Yadav son of
Mal Singh resident of House No.54, Bhamian Road, Jain Colony,
Ludhiana, and account number 50200074966285 is registered in
the name of Harsh Yadav son of Mal Singh resident of House
No.54, Bhamian Road, Jain Colony Ludhiana. That according to
record No.20257723743 is registered in the name of Pinki Yadav
resident of 82, 02 Jain Colony, Bhamian Kalan, Ludhiana, with
Mobile No.78887- 61103. Account No.20025707343 is registered
in the name of Harsh Yadav resident House No.54, Jaiin Colony
Bhamia Road, Ludhiana with mobile No90241-79767. Upon this
the record of mobile NO.78887-61103 was obtained. That
according to mobile No.78887-61103 is registered in the name of
Pinki Yadav wife of Harsh Yadav resident of House No.82, Gali
No.2, Jain Colony, to mobile Bhamia Kalan Ludhiana. With
regard No.90241-79767 the record was not obtained. During
inquiry with regard the to I.D. of harsh [email protected] a
record was obtained from google that according to which the
above gmail ID registered with mobile number 76962-10611. In
this regard, a record was obtained regarding mobile number
76962-10611. According to which the record mobile number
76962-10611 is registered in the name of Harsh Yadav son of Mal
Singh resident of house number 54, Bhamian Road, Jain Colony,
Ludhiana. During the investigation, it was found that Harsh Yadav
had given his mobile number and Gmail ID to the above bank
account have been opened in the name of different persons by
using the same and in these bank accounts Harsh Yadav
fraudulently obtained money from Davinder Sandhu Impex Pvt
Ltd. Besides this the amount has also been obtained by Harsh
Yadav from the account of her wife Pinki Yadav from her Fino
bank account No. 20257723743. From till date investigation, on
perusal the statement obtained, from the documents and the record
obtained from different banks it has been found that Harsh Yadav
5 of 11
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:099976
resident of House No.54, Jain Colony, Bhamia Roa, Ludhiana, is
doing service in the Unit of The Gehlewal Ludhiana, as H.R. of
Davinder Sandhu Impex Private Limited, Gurunanak Dev Nagar,
Ludhiana. After getting the monthly salary list of the employees
working in this unit signed by Production Manager Amarjit Singh,
he added the details of bank accounts in that list by using fake
signature of Production Manager Amarjit Singh and using fake
Aadhaar cards, in those accounts, from the year 2022 to June
2023, a total of Rs. 1,22,33,000/- (One Crore Twenty Two Lakh
Thirty Three Thousand) has been fraudulently obtained and
defrauded the applicant Devinder Sandhu. In the first instance,
Harsh Yadav, resident of House No. 54, Jain Colony Bhamian
Road, Ludhiana, fraudulently obtained Rs. 1,22,33000/- by
committing fraud with the applicant offence under section
420/465/467/468/471 IPC and 66-D I.T. Act is come to light.
Besides this, if any role of any other person is revealed during the
investigation, then appropriate action also be taken against him as
per Jaw. Recommendation:- If approved, then against Harsh
Yadav son of Mal Singh, resident of House No. 54, Jain Colony,
Bhamian Road, Ludhiana, under section 420/465/467/468/471 of
Penal Code and 66-D I.T. Act for registration of the case SHO P.S.
Basti Jodhewal, Ludhiana be requested to pass an order. Sd/-
Deputy Commissioner of Police, Local, Ludhiana dated
28.7.2023. Upon this Hon'ble Commissioner of Police Ludhiana
written to SHO Jodheal to register as case and investigate. Today
on receipt of application at Police Station, above case under
above offence got registered against the above accused. Original
application alongwith enclosed documents alongwith copy of FIR
for further investigation I take myself. Control Room be informed
through Wireless.
Closure of Rapat number 27 at 2:00 PM.'
3. Contentions
On behalf of the petitioner
Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the
petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. He submits that the
6 of 11
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:099976
petitioner has been in custody for last almost one year and investigation
is complete as challan stands presented on 06.11.2023 and charges have
been framed on 07.12.2023. He has further argued that no fruitful
purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner behind the bars as
conclusion of trial would take long time as out of total 11 Prosecution
Witnesses, none has been examined so far.
On behalf of the State
On the other hand, learned State Counsel appearing on
advance notice, accepts notice on behalf of respondent-State and has
filed the custody certificate of the petitioner, which is taken on record.
According to which, the petitioner is behind bars for 11 months, 18 days.
Learned State Counsel on instructions from the
Investigating Officer opposes the prayer for grant of regular bail on the
ground that that the allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature
but is not in a position to controvert the submissions made by counsel for
the petitioner.
On behalf of the Complainant
Learned counsel for the complainant has vehemently
opposes the prayer made in the petition by stating that the petition being
a boss of the other co-accused will definitely intimidate the other
witnesses and on that account, he seeks dismissal of the instant petition.
4. Analysis
From the above case it can be culled out the petitioner has
already suffered sufficient period in custody i.e. 11 months and 18 days
days and the dispute is related to embezzlement within a particular
company and it was not an offence against society and even otherwise
the candid admission of learned State Counsel would come handy for this
7 of 11
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:099976
Court to accept the petition that is there is no chance of recovery of
alleged amount embezzled by the petitioner and as per the principle of
the criminal jurisprudence, no one should be considered guilty, till the
guilt is proved beyond reasonable doubt, whereas in the instant case,
challan stands presented on 06.11.2023 and charges have been framed on
07.12.2023, out of 11 prosecution witnesses, none has been examined so
far which is sufficient for this Court to infer that the conclusion of trial is
likely to take considerable time and detaining the petitioner behind the
bars for an indefinite period.
Reliance can be made upon the judgment of the Apex Court
rendered in "Dataram versus State of Uttar Pradesh and another",
2018(2) R.C.R. (Criminal) 131, wherein it has been held that the grant of
bail is a general rule and putting persons in jail or in prison or in
correction home is an exception. Relevant paras of the said judgment is
reproduced as under:-
"2. A fundamental postulate of criminal jurisprudence is the
presumption of innocence, meaning thereby that a person is
believed to be innocent until found guilty. However, there are
instances in our criminal law where a reverse onus has been
placed on an accused with regard to some specific offences but
that is another matter and does not detract from the fundamental
postulate in respect of other offences. Yet another important facet
of our criminal jurisprudence is that the grant of bail is the
general rule and putting a person in jail or in a prison or in a
correction home (whichever expression one may wish to use) is an
exception. Unfortunately, some of these basic principles appear to
have been lost sight of with the result that more and more persons
are being incarcerated and for longer periods. This does not do
any good to our criminal jurisprudence or to our society.
3. There is no doubt that the grant or denial of bail is entirely the
discretion of the judge considering a case but even so, the exercise
8 of 11
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:099976
of judicial discretion has been circumscribed by a large number of
decisions rendered by this Court and by every High Court in the
country. Yet, occasionally there is a necessity to introspect whether
denying bail to an accused person is the right thing to do on the
facts and in the circumstances of a case.
4. While so introspecting, among the factors that need to be
considered is whether the accused was arrested during
investigations when that person perhaps has the best opportunity
to tamper with the evidence or influence witnesses. If the
investigating officer does not find it necessary to arrest an accused
person during investigations, a strong case should be made out for
placing that person in judicial custody after a charge sheet is filed.
Similarly, it is important to ascertain whether the accused was
participating in the investigations to the satisfaction of the
investigating officer and was not absconding or not appearing
when required by the investigating officer. Surely, if an accused is
not hiding from the investigating officer or is hiding due to some
genuine and expressed fear of being victimised, it would be a
factor that a judge would need to consider in an appropriate case.
It is also necessary for the judge to consider whether the accused
is a first-time offender or has been accused of other offences and if
so, the nature of such offences and his or her general conduct. The
poverty or the deemed indigent status of an accused is also an
extremely important factor and even Parliament has taken notice
of it by incorporating an Explanation to section 436 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973. An equally soft approach to
incarceration has been taken by Parliament by inserting section
436A in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
5. To put it shortly, a humane attitude is required to be adopted by
a judge, while dealing with an application for remanding a
suspect or an accused person to police custody or judicial custody.
There are several reasons for this including maintaining the
dignity of an accused person, howsoever poor that person might
be, the requirements of Article 21 of the Constitution and the fact
that there is enormous overcrowding in prisons, leading to social
and other problems as noticed by this Court in In Re-Inhuman
9 of 11
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:099976
Conditions in 1382 Prisons, 2017(4) RCR (Criminal) 416:
2017(5) Recent Apex Judgments (R.A.J.) 408 : (2017) 10 SCC 658
6. The historical background of the provision for bail has been
elaborately and lucidly explained in a recent decision delivered in
Nikesh Tara chand Shah v. Union of India, 2017 (13) SCALE 609
going back to the days of the Magna Carta. In that decision,
reference was made to Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia v. State of Punjab,
(1980) 2 SCC 565 in which it is observed that it was held way
back in Nagendra v. King-Emperor, AIR 1924 Calcutta 476 that
bail is not to be withheld as a punishment. Reference was also
made to Emperor v. Hutchinson, AIR 1931 Allahabad 356 wherein
it was observed that grant of bail is the rule and refusal is the
exception. The provision for bail is therefore age-old and the
liberal interpretation to the provision for bail is almost a century
old, going back to colonial days.
7. However, we should not be understood to mean that bail should
be granted in every case. The grant or refusal of bail is entirely
within the discretion of the judge hearing the matter and though
that discretion is unfettered, it must be exercised judiciously and in
a humane manner and compassionately. Also, conditions for the
grant of bail ought not to be so strict as to be incapable of
compliance, thereby making the grant of bail illusory."
Therefore, to elucidate further, this Court is conscious of the
basic fundamental law that right to speedy trial is a part of reasonable,
fair and just procedure guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of
India. This constitutional right cannot be denied to the accused as is the
mandate of the Apex court in "Hussainara Khatoon and ors (IV) v.
Home Secretary, State of Bihar, Patna", (1980) 1 SCC 98. Besides this,
reference can be drawn upon that pre-conviction period of the under-
trials should be as short as possible keeping in view the nature of
accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the
nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tampering
with the witness or apprehension of threat to the complainant.
10 of 11
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:099976
5. Decision:
In view of the aforesaid discussions made hereinabove, the
petitioner is directed to be released on regular bail under Section 439
Cr.P.C. on his furnishing bail and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the
trial Court/Duty Magistrate, concerned.
However, it is made clear that anything stated hereinabove
shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the
case.
The petition in the aforesaid terms stands allowed.
Since the main case has been allowed, pending
application(s), if any also stands disposed of.
(SANDEEP MOUDGIL)
JUDGE
05.08.2024
anuradha
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether reportable Yes/No
11 of 11
