IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Gajendra Singh ... Petitioner Versus State of Haryana ... Respondent

1. The date when the judgment is reserved 12.05.2026 2. The date when the judgment is pronounced 14.05.2026 3. The date when the judgment is uploaded on the 14.05.2026 website

4. Whether only operative part of the judgment is Full pronounced or whether the full judgment is pronounced

5. The delay, if any, of the pronouncement of full Not applicable judgment, and reasons thereof CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Present: Mr. R.S. Kundu, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. Neeraj Poswal, AAG, Haryana, for the respondent-State.

Mr. Rohit Mittal, Advocate, for the complainant.

***

MANISHA BATRA , J.

1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (For short “BNSS”) seeking anticipatory bail in the FIR mentioned below:-

FIR No. Dated Police Station Sections

63 13.03.2026 City Ratia, District409, 420, 467, 468 and Fatehabad 471 of IPC

2. Brief facts relevant for the purpose of disposal of this petition are that the aforementioned FIR was registered on the basis of a written complaint submitted by the complainant Jasbeer Singh alleging that he was proprietor of M/s Haryana Pesticides which was dealing in the business of trading of pesticides. His firm had been purchasing pesticides from Nagarjuna and NACL Industrial Limited Company (For short “Company”) since the last many years. At the time of giving dealership to him, the officers/officials of the company had procured his signatures on five blank cheques and blank letterpads by way of security. These cheques pertained to his account operated at Oriental Bank of Commerce which was later on merged with the Punjab National Bank. The complainant had been making considerable sales of the products of the company and he used to deposit the amount payable by him from time to time with it. From the last some years, Pawan Kumar, Managing Director of the Company and some officers namely the present petitioner, V.N. Raju, Kanan Upadhyay, Raghvendra alias Raghu, Sushil Sharma, Yogesh Partap Singh etc. as well as some other officials had told him that each employee of the company had been given a particular target to achieve and persuaded him to receive more products from the company by assuring that those products would be got sold by them through the complainant and also told that they would guide him as in whose particular name, the invoices were to be prepared. On being induced by them, the complainant agreed to do the same since they had also extended threats that they would not sell their pesticides to him if he disagreed to their offer.

3. The complainant further alleged that the petitioner and the above named officers/officials then started getting issued invoices in the name of his firm qua sale of pesticides without obtaining any order from time to time. He did not receive the products but was simply asked to prepare some bills. He was assured that the credit note will come into the account of his firm subsequently and the petitioner and his accomplices took responsibility for the same. The complainant further alleged that on receiving the balance statement sheet up to 31.12.2023 from the company, he noticed that an amount of Rs.2,54,98,397/- was shown to be payable by him and the same was demanded from him though the same was not payable. The complainant intimated the company that the said balance statement was not correct as there was difference qua the quantity of the products that were actually sold by the petitioner and the one that were mentioned in the balance statement sheet. The petitioner alleged that pesticides worth lacs of rupees was shown to be sold by the company to his firm during the year 2023-24 whereas it was not so and by preparing some fabricated invoices and false receipts, the petitioner and other accused had cheated and defrauded him by carrying out transactions by creati