Vivek Alias Nandu Alias Vivek Malhotra vs State Of Punjab
2026 Latest Caselaw 2562 P&H

Citation : 2026 Latest Caselaw 2562 P&H
Judgement Date : 16 March, 2026

[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Vivek Alias Nandu Alias Vivek Malhotra vs State Of Punjab on 16 March, 2026

                           CRM-M-34750-2025                     1

                                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                                                    AT CHANDIGARH
                           108
                                                          CRM-M-34750-2025
                                                         Decided on: 16.03.2026

                           VIVEK ALIAS NANDU ALIAS VIVEK MALHOTRA
                                                                                                  ......Petitioner
                                                                    Versus
                           STATE OF PUNJAB
                                                                                               ......Respondent

                           CORAM:            HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH

                           Present:          Mr. Bharat Kumar, Advocate, for the petitioner.

                                             Mr. Vinay Malhotra, DAG, Punjab.

                                                                    ****

                           SANJAY VASHISTH, J.

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 of FIR Date Section(s) Police Station District Petitioner (s) No. Vivek @ 69 09.06.2025 316(2), 318(4) Jodhewal Police Nandu alias of BNS Commissionerate, Vivek Ludhiana Malhotra, aged about 44 years

2. On 07.07.2025, following order was passed:-

"2. Counsel reads out the contents of the FIR and submits that it is a case of civil dispute. It is submitted that complainant Harish Passi used to supply hosiery material to the named accused, Sovit Kumar @ Sovi, Gaggi and Nandu Malhotra, which was being manufactured in the complainant's unit, namely, MR Knits International.

3. As per the allegations, the named accused initially made payments for the hosiery goods upon

delivery. However, on 12.09.2022, there was a balance of an amount of Rs.25,56,213/-, which was yet to be received by the complainant. After certain calculations were carried out, an amount of Rs.8,00,000/- was paid on 31.08.2024, with a mutual understanding that now the remaining balance amount is around Rs.10,59,000/-. Subsequently, on 11.10.2024, an application was moved by the complainant against Sovit Kumar @ Sovi, Vivek Kumar @ Nandu (petitioner herein) and Gaggi Malhotra, which was duly inquired into by the police.

4. Counsel contends that again certain terms were laid down in regard to payment of the remaining balance amount of Rs.10,59,000/-. As per the agreement, an amount of Rs.40,000/- was to be transferred to the complainant on a monthly basis, and a cheque bearing No.765796 of PNB Branch Civil Lines Ludhiana, amounting to Rs. 10,19,000/-, was given to the complainant Harish Passi as security. The allegation now is that neither monthly payments are being made nor the entire settled amount has been paid in any manner. Thus, counsel argues that the registration of FIR is nothing more than an arm- twisting tactic to force the petitioner to pay the remaining balance amount, whereas it could be sorted out either by presenting the cheque or by filing a civil suit. Even if the allegations are taken up to be correct at face value, the registration of FIR is not legally sustainable. Accordingly, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail.

5. Notice of motion.

6. Mr. Neeraj Madaan, learned Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, who is present in Court on advance copy, accepts notice and seeks time to respond to the submissions addressed by learned counsel opposite, after seeking instructions. And, in case of necessity, to file status report.

7. Adjourned to 29.09.2025.

8. In the meanwhile, 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.).

9. Besides, the petitioner would submit/surrender his passport before the Arresting Officer and an undertaking on oath that in case of leaving the

Country, he would seek prior permission from the Investigating Agency/concerned Court."

3. Continuing his submissions, learned counsel for the

petitioner contends that in compliance of the order dated 07.07.2025,

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. However, he fairly submits that passport of the

petitioner is due to be renewed. Therefore, he prays for grant of some

time to submit the same before the concerned investigating officer.

4. Learned State counsel on instructions from ASI Balkar

Singh, confirms the said averment made by counsel for the petitioner of

joining the investigation on 22.08.2025 by the petitioner.

However, he submits that to obviate the possibility of fleeing

from the country by the petitioner, he be directed to surrender his