Harmander Singh vs State Of Punjab on 23 April, 2026

                           CRM-M-33720-2025 (O&M)                    1


                                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                                                   AT CHANDIGARH
                           103
                                                  CRM-M-33720-2025 (O&M)
                                                    Decided on: 23.04.2026

                           HARMANDER SINGH
                                                                                        ......Petitioner
                                                             Versus
                           STATE OF PUNJAB
                                                                                      ......Respondent

                           CORAM:       HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH

                           Present:     Mr. Bipan Ghai, Senior Advocate, with
                                        Mr. Nikhil Ghai, Advocate,
                                        for the petitioner.

                                        Mr. Neeraj Madaan, Sr. DAG, Punjab.

                                        Mr. Baltej Singh Sidhu, Senior Advocate, with
                                        Mr. Himmat Singh Sidhu, Advocate,
                                        for the complainant.

                                                              ****

                           SANJAY VASHISTH, J.

CRM-12427-2026

1. Present application has been moved by the

applicant/petitioner for placing on record copy of the amended petition,

vide order dated 17.09.2025 passed by this Court.

2. Notice in the application.

3. On advance notice, Mr. Himmat Singh Sidhu, Advocate,

accepts notice on behalf of the complainant, and Mr. Neeraj Madaan, Sr.

DAG, Punjab, puts an appearance on behalf of the respondent/State, and

raise no objection, if prayer made in the present application, is allowed.

4. Considering the averments mentioned in the present

application, prayer made therein is allowed.

5. Registry is directed to tag the amended petition appended

with the present application, at the appropriate place with the file.

6. CM stands disposed of.

CRM-M-33720-2025

1. Prayer in this petition, filed under Section 482 of the BNSS,

2023 (earlier Section 438 Cr.P.C.), is for grant of anticipatory bail to the

petitioner, who has been booked in a criminal case arising out of First

Information Report, as detailed hereunder:-

Name & age FIR Date Section(s) Police District of Petitioner No. Station

(s) Harmander 93 27.05.2025 308(2), 316(2), 351(2) of Sadar Sri Singh, aged BNS (corresponding to Sri Muktsar about 61 sections 384, 406 and 506 Muktsar Sahib years IPC) and Sections 65, 66 of Sahib I.T. Act [offence under sections 316(4), 336(2), 336(3), 340(2) of BNS (corresponding to sections 408, 465, 468 and 471 of IPC) added later on, vide GD No.35 dated 15.09.2025]

2. On 02.07.2025, following order was passed:-

"1. xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx

2. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that petitioner had served the complainant-company i.e. Satia Industries Limited, from the year 1991 until April 2024. In this regard, reliance is placed upon a certificate dated 13.03.2024 issued by the complainant-company itself, wherein the petitioner's commendable career and valuable contributions were acknowledged. The certificate reflects that the company was fully satisfied and indebted for the useful services rendered by the petitioner during his long tenure.

3. With respect to the allegations that petitioner, after his retirement, engaged in acts of blackmailing, learned counsel for the petitioner refers to a complaint dated 18.04.2025, which was

addressed by the petitioner to the GST and Income Tax Departments via email. It is submitted that the said complaint is currently under inquiry/investigation, and even if the complainant- company claims the allegations to be frivolous, such a complaint cannot form the basis for initiating criminal proceedings against the petitioner under the alleged offences.

Learned counsel also argues that if any harassment, humiliation, or reputational damage was caused to the company on account of the said complaint, appropriate remedy available to the complainant-company was to seek damages under the relevant civil laws, rather than resorting to criminal prosecution.

4. Further, it is submitted that any offence, if at all committed as alleged by the complainant- company, would fall within the purview of the Information Technology Act, and such offences are bailable in nature. Moreover, petitioner is ready to join the investigation and to fully cooperate, if protected from arrest by this Court. Thus, prays for grant of concession of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in the present case.

5. Notice of motion.

6. On advance notice, Mr. Neeraj Madaan, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, appeared on behalf of the respondent-State. Mr. Baltej Singh Sidhu, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Divij Datt and Mr. Himmat Singh Sidhu, Advocates, put an appearance on behalf of the complainant.

7. Counsel for the complainant opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail to the petitioner, submitting that petitioner's conduct since his retirement has been humiliating. It is contended that petitioner is misusing the company's data, which has allegedly been stolen by him, and that after retirement, he has been blackmailing the company on various pretexts.

8. Adjourned to 17.09.2025.

9. In the meanwhile, the petitioner is directed to join the investigation as and when required to do so by the Investigating Agency. In the event of his arrest, the petitioner shall be released on ad- interim bail, subject to his furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer. The petitioner shall also be abide by all the conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.).

10. Besides, it is directed that petitioner would hand over his passport to the Investigating Agency or to Court concerned, if he possesses. Otherwise, would submit an affidavit, disclosing the fact that he does not possess any passport.

It is also directed that before leaving country any time during trial, petitioner would seek prior permission of the Court.

11. Let the petitioner and representatives of the complainant - company be present before this Court, on the next date of hearing to find out solution to resolve the dispute amicably."

3. Continuing his submissions, learned Senior counsel for the

petitioner contends that in compliance of the order dated 02.07.2025,

passed by this Court, petitioner has joined the investigation, and has fully

co-operated. Therefore, he prays for confirmation of the said interim

anticipatory bail order.

4. On the other hand, learned State counsel submits that

although, the petitioner has joined investigation, but he has not fully

cooperated, as he failed to provide his voice sample.

5. In response, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner

submits that petitioner was never called upon to furnish his voice sample.

However, it is fairly submitted that petitioner is ready to provide the

same, if one opportunity is granted to him.

6. Opposing the grant of bail to the petitioner, learned Senior

Counsel for the complainant contends that petitioner has misused the

concession of interim anticipatory bail already granted by this Court.

It is submitted that in December 2025, a ransom amounting

to Rs.300 crores was allegedly demanded by accused persons in

connivance with the present petitioner, by issuing forged letters

purportedly emanating from the Enforcement Directorate, in connection

with FIR No. 232 dated 30.12.2025.

7. In response to this, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner

submits that in relation to the allegations arising out of FIR No. 232 dated

30.12.2025, petitioner has already been granted regular bail by the

competent Court.

8. This factual position has not been disputed by learned Senior

Counsel for the complainant.

9. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

10. Since, petitioner has already joined the investigation; ad-

interim bail order dated 02.07.2025, passed by this Court is hereby made

absolute. Accordingly, present petition is allowed.

However, petitioner shall continue to join the investigation

as and when required to do so and abide by all the terms and conditions

laid down under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023.

11. Accordingly, petition stands disposed of.

12. It is made clear that present order shall be subject to

furnishing of voice sample by the petitioner, within a period of two

weeks from today, before the concerned Magistrate.

13. It is further directed that present order shall also be subject

to depositing of passport by the petitioner with the Investigating Agency

or the Court concerned, if he is in possession of the same, within a period

of one week from today. In the alternative, petitioner shall file an

affidavit stating that he does not possess any passport.

14. It is clarified that in case, aforesaid conditions are not

complied with, this order would be considered as non est automatically.

15. With the directions issued here above, present petition stands

disposed of.

(SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE 23.04.2026 Lavisha

Whether Speaking/Reasoned: YES/NO Whether Reportable: YES/NO