SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(HP) 2573

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA


2026:HHC:16338


Cr. MP (M) Nos. 103, 509, 579 and 611 of 2025


Reserved on: 08.04.2026

Date of Decision: 13.05.2026



1. Cr. MP (M) No. 103 of 2025

Yudh Chand Bains ...Petitioner

Versus

State of Himachal Pradesh …Respondent


2. Cr. MP (M) No. 509 of 2025

Satvir Minhas ...Petitioner

Versus

State of Himachal Pradesh ...Respondent


3. Cr.MP(M) No.579 of 2025

Ashok Kumar Puri ...Petitioner

Versus

State of Himachal Pradesh ...Respondent


4. Cr.MP(M) No. 611 of 2025

Harish Chand …. Petitioner

Versus

State of Himachal Pradesh ...Respondent


Coram

Hon’ble Mr Justice Rakesh Kainthla, Judge.


Whether approved for reporting?11 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes.No.


For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. N.S. Chandel and Mr Ankush Dass Sood, Senior Advocates, with M/s Sidharth Satija, Shwetima Dogra and Ankit Dhiman, Advocate, for the petitioner(s), in Cr.MP(M) Nos. 103 and 611 of 2025 and Mr Umesh Kanwar, Advocate, for the petitioner(s), in Cr.MP(M) Nos. 509 and 579 of 2025.

For the Respondent/State. : Mr Naveen Pahwa, Senior Advocate, with M/s Vaibhav Shrivastva and Lokender Kutlehria, Additional Advocates General, assisted by Additional Superintendent of Police Narvir Singh Rathore, SV&ACB (SIU)

Petitioner Advocates:Vikrant Chandel ,Respondent Advocate: AG AG

______________________________________

Rakesh Kainthla, Judge

The petitioners have filed the bail petitions seeking pre-arrest bail in FIR No. 2 of 2025 dated 08.01.2025 registered at Police Station State Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau (SV & ACB), Una, District Una, H.P. for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 420, 468, and 471 and 120-B of Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 13(1) (a) & 13 (1) (2) of Prevention of Corruption (PC) Act. Since all the petitions pertain to the same FIR, therefore, they are being taken up together for disposal.

2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present petitions are that a complaint was received from the Secretary, Cooperation to the Government of Himachal Pradesh, along with a report of the Managing Director of Kangra Central Cooperative Bank Ltd. (KCCB) regarding fraud in the bank accounts of M/s. Himalaya Snow Village and M/s. Hotel Lake Palace, properties of petitioner Yudh Chand Bains. Yudh Chand Bains had taken multiple loans from KCC Bank, which were advanced in violation of the Bank’s lending policies and the guidelines of the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) and the National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development (NABARD). Police conducted an inquiry and found that a utilisation certificate dated 30.6.2019, stated to have been issued by Future Craft Palampur to Himalaya Snow Village, was forged. Future Craft clarified that it is an architectural firm that can only issue structural stability certificates and building drawings. The Bank had approved petitioner Yudh Chand Bains' loan requests unconditionally. His investment from personal resources was not verified. Family members who were already guarantors in another loan were again included as guarantors. No monitoring of fund utilisation was conducted. The loans were granted despite several accounts being in default. Post-loan fund utilisation monitoring was completely ignored. Reports by a Chartered Accountant and an Additional Registrar, Cooperative Societies declared the loan as fraudulent. The Branch Manager of KCCB Bank, Government College, Una, also informed that a loan account was maintained in the Bank in the name of Hotel Himalaya Snow Village, Manali. ₹16 crores were disbursed on 11.7.2019 and ₹4 crores were disbursed on 27.7.2019. Petitioner Yudh Chand Bains transferred the money to another account in the name of Himachal Home Furnishing and Hotel through RTGS. The money was transferred to various accounts, and further investigation is required. The Board of Directors relaxed the terms and conditions mentioned in the sanction letter. Project Monitoring and Loan Disbursement Committee (PMLDC) recommended reconsideration of the relaxations granted to the petitioner, but the loan was disbursed despite this recommendation. The police registered an FIR after receipt of the preliminary inquiry report.

3. The petitioner, Yudh Chand Bains, filed a bail petition asserting that he is a reputed person in society and has been falsely implicated. The prosecution's case is based on a totally absurd, baseless, and imaginary story. There is nothing on record to connect the petitioner to the commission of a crime. The investigating agency is compelling the petitioner to withdraw his complaint. The petitioner is a permanent resident of District Mandi. He would abide by the terms and conditions that the Court may impose. Hence, it was prayed that the present petition be allowed and the petitioner be released on bail.

4. The petitioner, Harish Chand, filed a bail petition asserting that he is a reputed person in society and has been falsely implicated. The prosecution's case is based on a totally absurd, baseless and imaginary story. There is nothing to connect him to the commission of a crime. His presence is not required for the investigation. He is a permanent resident of District Mandi, and he would abide by the terms and conditions that the Court may impose. Hence, it was prayed that the pres

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top