JUDGMENT :

H.S. Grewal, J.

1. This petition has been filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (erstwhile Section 438 Cr.P.C.) for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner-Aditya Jain in case FIR No.61 dated 19.02.2026, registered under Sections 316(2) & 318(4) of BNS, 2023 (erstwhile Sections 406 & 420 IPC) and Sections 338, 336(3) & 340(2) of BNS, 2023 (erstwhile Sections 467, 468 & 471 IPC) added later on vide DDR No.37 dated 26.03.2026, at Police Station Division No.8, Ludhiana.

FACTUAL MATRIX

2. The petitioner is a registered goldsmith and the sole proprietor of M/s S.R.K. Jewellers, Ludhiana, engaged in the business of purchase and sale of gold articles. The complainant, namely Sagar Singla, along with his father Susham Singla, is carrying on a jewellery business under the name and style of M/s Jagdish Jewellers Pvt. Ltd. The parties have been maintaining long-standing business relations since the year 2014.

3. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner, who is a goldsmith, cheated the complainant-Firm by not delivering gold despite receiving payment and was having a dishonest intention from the very inception of the business transactions. It is alleged that the complainant paid a total sum of Rs.20,38,80,000/- to the petitioner's three firms for booking of 101.94 kilograms of gold, out of which, the petitioner delivered only 9.532 kilograms of gold valued at Rs.7,51,91,275/- and refunded Rs.1,76,50,000/- and thereby allegedly misappropriated the remaining amount of Rs.11,10,38,725/-. It is further alleged in the FIR that during the month of November, 2024, payment had been made for the delivery of 16.29 kilograms of 24-carat gold bars but the petitioner delivered gold weighing only 2.426 kilograms, valued at Rs.1,89,67,301/-. In an another transaction, the complainant booked 33.04 kilograms of gold under a scheme at the rate of Rs.20 lakhs per kilogram, valid up to 21.01.2025. However, the petitioner delivered only 8.699 kilograms gold and assured that the remaining 24.341 kilograms would be delivered shortly. It is further alleged that the petitioner subsequently started taking bookings through another company, namely, Finegold Jewellers Private Limited, to which the complainant transferred Rs.10 crores between 16.01.2025 and 25.03.2025 for booking 50.400 kilograms of gold. Against this, the petitioner delivered only approximately 11.563 kilograms of gold by 25.03.2025, leaving an outstanding balance of 38.837 kilograms. Thereafter, in March 2025, the petitioner introduced his wife, Akriti Jain, as a guarantor and relying on their assurances, the complainant transferred Rs.3,70,00,000/- in April, 2025 to the accounts of M/s Ram Krishan Jewellers, allegedly run by Akriti Jain, for booking of gold. In this transaction, the petitioner delivered 4.215 kilograms of gold corresponding to the said amount. However, despite repeated demands, the petitioner failed to deliver the remaining gold or refund the outstanding amount.

SUBMISSIONS

4. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a registered goldsmith and sole proprietor of M/s S.R.K. Jewellers, Ludhiana while the complainant, namely, Sagar Singla is engaged in the business of gold articles under the name and style of M/s Jagdish Jewellers Pvt. Ltd., Chandigarh. The petitioner and the complainant were in a business relationship since 2014. It is submitted that the dispute is purely civil in nature and arises out of business transactions between the parties. The allegations against the petitioner are vague and baseless, as nothing is due towards the petitioner's firm.

4.1 Learned Senior Counsel further submits that the petitioner's firm has already delivered gold against the payments received from the complainant at the prevailing market rates at the time of supply. Reference has been made to a chart (Annexure P-5), supported by tax invoices, which shows that against the total payment of Rs.6,60,80,000/- received fro