IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANAAT CHANDIGARH Mukesh Saini ….Petitioner versus State of Haryana ….Respondent Date of Decision: February 02, 2026 Date of Uploading: February 02, 2026 CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Present:- Mr. Pradeep Chhoker, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Gurmeet Singh, AAG Haryana.

Mr. Nikhil Anand, Advocate for the complainant.

*****

SUMEET GOEL, J. (ORAL)

Present petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, in case bearing FIR No.174 dated 04.07.2023, registered for the offences punishable under Section 66-D of the Information Technology Act and Sections 120-B, 408, 420 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short ‘IPC’), registered at Police Station Sector

17, Faridabad, District Faridabad.

2. The gravamen of the FIR in question is that Manish Bindal, Proprietor of Trans Cargo India, lodged a complaint with the Commissioner of Police, Sector-31, Faridabad on 08.05.2023 against his former employees, namely Mohd. Javed, Narender Kumar @ Narender Poonia, Rakesh Sharma, Sudhir Bhardwaj, and others, including Coco Holland Tractor, R.K. Service Station, Ishwar Filling Station, Highway Petro Diesel (IOCL), etc. The complainant company had appointed four qualified professionals to conduct an internal audit in November 2020. The auditors reported misappropriation ₹

of 1.62 crore by the accused persons within a period of one year. Accused – Mohd. Javed, while employed with the complainant company, had business dealings with IOCL-affiliated petrol pumps such as Coco Holland Tractor, R.K. Service Station, and Ishwar Filling Station. It was further revealed that accused Mohd. Javed, Narender Kumar @ Narender Poonia, and Rakesh Sharma withdrew money from the complainant company’s account on various false pretexts and transferred the same to different bank accounts. Upon completion of the audit, the internal audit team concluded that the ₹

accused persons had collectively misappropriated a total amount of 2.32 crore.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner has been falsely implicated into the FIR in question. Learned counsel has argued that since the inception of job of the petitioner, he remained at Noida (Uttar Pradesh) and never had any occasion to visit the head office at Faridabad. Learned counsel has further argued that the petitioner was assigned only the work of maintenance of trucks of the complainant and the petitioner used to report to one Mr. Ankit Khanna, he being the maintenance head. Learned counsel has iterated that all the cash transactions and company affairs were undertaken by one Naffis Khan and after him by Manish Bindal (Complainant). Learned counsel has argued that the petitioner had never ever been the person in-charge for handling cash transactions, account management or any other kind of public dealing on behalf of the complainant. Learned counsel further argued that it is only in the month of October 2021, when he was asked to visit the head office at Faridabad and at this particular point of time, the petitioner came to know about alleged forgery in the company. Leaned counsel further iterated that, in fact, Manish Bindal had pressurized the petitioner to stand as a witness along with him before the police in respect of the alleged fraud, but the petitioner did not accede to his command. Learned counsel has further argued that there is no even an iota of evidence to show complicity of the petitioner, in the present case.

3.1. Learned counsel has also argued that co-accused of the petitioner, namely, Sudhir Bhardwaj, Ayaz Khan, Hakumddin and Mohd. Javed have been accorded concession of regular bail, vide order dated 14.01.2026, passed in CRM-M-68742-2025, CRM-M-56962-2025, CRM- M-63343-2025 and CRM-M-66796-2025, respectively. Learned counsel has argued that neither any recovery is to be effected from the petitioner nor is he the beneficiar