JUDGMENT :

RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL, J.

1. 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.235 dated 14.08.2025 registered under Sections 318(2), 336(2), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 316, 319 and 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 66-C and 66-D of the Information Technology Act, 2000, at Police Station Sadar, District Mansa.

2. Brief facts as per the prosecution case are that the petitioner along with co-accused impersonated as Senior IPS Officer and cheated the complainant for huge amount of Rs.6 Crores. Hence, the present FIR.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and he has not committed any such offence. He argued that registration of present FIR is wholly without territorial jurisdiction and in direct violation of Sections 197 and 198 of BNS, 2023. He further argued that alleged sale deeds are genuine and have no nexus with the alleged cheated amount of Rs.6 crores and the amounts utilized are fully accounted. He argued that the complainant himself is a habitual offender as number of FIRs have already been registered against him. Further, the complainant, who was a retired Government employee, has neither disclosed any lawful source of such colossal funds nor produced any bank statement substantiating the alleged payments. Further, co-accused Maya Devi and Sarwan Kumar have already been granted the concession of anticipatory bail by the learned trial Court, vide order dated 09.09.2025. No recovery is to be effected from the petitioner. Moreover, the petitioner has clean antecedents as he is not involved in any other case. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner is ready and willing to join the investigation as and when called upon to do so by the investigating agency.

4. After registration of the FIR, investigation has been initiated and is under way. Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner had moved an application for grant of anticipatory bail which has been dismissed by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mansa, vide order dated 20.10.2025.

5. On the other hand, learned State counsel has already filed the status report in the matter and while referring to the same, he has opposed the prayer of the petitioner for grant of anticipatory bail on the ground that the allegations levelled against the petitioner are serious in nature. He argued that the petitioner was specifically named in the FIR. He further argued that the petitioner in connivance with co-accused persons has duped the complainant for crores of rupees by obtaining huge amount from him by impersonating as Senior IPS Officer. He further submits that the petitioner and his brother-Bhoop Singh hatched conspiracy, purchased property with the cheated amount in the name of other accused persons and later transferred it in the name of their wives. He further argued that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required for a fair and proper investigation in the matter, to recover the amount involved as well as to unearth the modus operandi of accused. Hence, he prays for dismissal of the petition.

6. Learned counsel for the complainant adopts the submissions made by learned State counsel and while opposing the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, has contended that the petitioner has played an active role in the crime and, thus, does not deserve the concession of bail.

7. Heard.

8. In the present case, the allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature. He is specifically named in the FIR. As per the status report, the petitioner along with co-accused has duped the complainant for crores of rupees by impersonating as Senior IPS Officer. The petitioner after hatching criminal conspiracy with Bhoop Singh, had purchased the property out of the duped amount in the name of co-accused persons and thereafter, transferred the same