IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-13057-2026 Date of decision: 06.04.2026 SHUBHAM KUMAR ….Petitioner Versus STATE OF PUNJAB ....Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL Present:- Mr. B.S. Bhalla, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Amit Shukla, DAG Punjab.

..…

RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL, J. (ORAL)

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.125 dated 27.07.2025, registered under Sections 319(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 61(2) BNS, at Police Station Civil Lines, District Amritsar.

2. Brief facts of the present case are that the petitioner in collusion with his associates fraudulently obtained documents from the complainant and opened a fictitious bank account and sanctioned a loan of Rs.70,000/- in his name. Hence the present FIR.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further contends that the petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any offence. He submits that the petitioner was merely working as a Sales Officer with the company and his duty was limited to uploading the documents on the portal of the finance company whereas the loan was sanctioned by the competent authority of the company. He submits that each and every document is in the possession of police officials and no recovery is to be effected from him. He submits that the petitioner has clean antecedents as he is not involved in any other case. Learned counsel 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 qua the petitioner. Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner had moved an application for grant of anticipatory bail which has been dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar vide order dated

05.03.2026.

5. On the other hand, learned State counsel has already filed the status report in the matter, and he, while referring to the same, has opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail, by submitting that the allegations levelled against the petitioner are serious in nature. He submits that the petitioner has played a crucial role in commission of the crime. He further submits that the petitioner is not a mere peripheral participant but the principal architect of the entire conspiracy. The petitioner while working as an employee abused his official position and in collusion with unknown associates misused the Aadhar and PAN details of the complainant to prepare forged identity documents and create a fake identity. On the basis of such forged documents the petitioner opened fictitious bank account and fraudulently sanctioned a loan of Rs.70,000/- in the name of complainant from a non-existent firm thereby misappropriating the loan amount. He further submits that the complainant has denied availing any such loan and has confirmed misuse of his identity documents. He submits that the documentary record of the finance company, statement of the sales manager, bank record and findings of preliminary enquiry clearly establish the involvement of the petitioner. He further submits that non-existence of the firm and false address substantiate the fraudulent design. The material on record demonstrates a pre-planned conspiracy and active involvement of the petitioner supported by cogent documentary and oral evidence. Thus, learned State counsel prays that custodial interrogation of petitioner is required for effective investigation. Learned State counsel thus, prays for dismissal of the petition.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record, this Court finds that the allegations against the petitioner are grave and pertain to a well-orchestrated act of fraud involving misuse of identity documents, preparation of forged records, and fraudulent sa