Samar Mohan Ranga v. State of Haryana

IN Samar Mo

State of H

Date of d Date of U

CORAM Present:

SUMEET

¶1seeking g 2023 in F under Sec Act, 1988 BNS, 202 Panchkula

¶2of a refer financial i of Munic Bank, Se Corporati THE HIGH COURT OF PUN CHANDIG

ohan Ranga

V/s Haryana

decision: 17.07.2026 Uploading : 18.07.2026 M: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Mr. Vinod Ghai, Senior Adv Mr. Ritesh Aggarwal, Advoc Mr. Gurmeet Singh, AAG Ha ***** T GOEL, J. (Oral) Present petition has been grant of anticipatory/pre-arrest b FIR No.05 dated 24.03.2026 r ctions 13(1)(a) read with Section 8 and Sections 316(5), 318(4), 23 at Police Station State Vigila a. As per the prosecution versio rence received from the Governm irregularities in Fixed Deposit R cipal Corporation, Panchkula m ector-11, Panchkula. As per on Panchkula had recorded sixt

NJAB AND HARYANA AT ARH CRM-M-31372-2026

....Petitioner

....Respondent SUMEET GOEL ocate with cate for the petitioner. aryana. filed on behalf of the petition bail under Section 482 of BNS registered for offences punisha n 13(2) of Prevention of Corrupti 336(3), 338, 340(2) and 61(2) ance and Anti Corruption Bure on, the FIR was lodged on the ba ment of Haryana regarding serio Receipts (FDRs) and bank accou maintained with Kotak Mahind the allegations, the Munici een FDRs amounting to more th

ner SS, able ion of eau, asis ous unts dra pal

Rs.145 c reconcilia records m bank. It balance r maturity v were not per the al involving registered whose inv

amounts Corporati subsequen the presen basis of m transactio persons.

¶3petitioner named in petitioner employee learned rores with a maturity value e ation of records, substantial discr maintained by the Municipal Cor has been alleged that eleven eflected in the bank statements value. Furthermore, certain bank reflected in the official records llegations, the discrepancies rev public funds and accordingly, d against unknown bank offic volvement was to be ascertained During the course of invest were allegedly siphoned fro on Panchkula via routing them t ntly utilized for acquisition of im nt petitioner has surfaced during material collected by the investi ons and property dealings co Learned senior counsel for t r has been falsely implicated int n the FIR. Learned senior cou r is neither an employee of e/official of the Municipal Corp senior counsel, petiti

exceeding Rs.158 crores. Duri repancies were noticed between rporation and those supplied by FDRs had matured, however s did not match with the expec k accounts were discovered wh of the Municipal Corporation. vealed a large-scale financial fra , the FIR in question came to cials and other unknown perso during the course of investigatio tigation, it has surfaced that hu om the accounts of Munici through various bank accounts a mmovable properties. The name g the course of investigation on igating agency, including financ nnected with the main accus the petitioner has iterated that to the FIR in question as he is n unsel has further iterated that Kotak Mahindra Bank nor poration Panchkula. According ioner is merely a prope

ing ted ich As aud be ons on. uge pal and e of cial sed not an to

dealer/com instruction has been of the pet in the nam did not d rightful co proceedin material w senior cou evidences possession of the pet has been f on the bas direct ev embezzlem petitioner no crimin interrogat petitioner tamper w conditions of these entreated mmission agent who facilitated c ns of co-accused Pushpinder Si further contended that the amou itioner have been utilized for the mes of relative(s) of the said co-derive any wrongful gain from ommission. It has been further ng on assumptions and conject which connects the petitioner w unsel has emphasized that the en s, bank records and financial t n of the investigating agency and titioner is not warranted in the fa further contended that the name sis of disclosure statement(s) of vidence which would connect ment. Learned senior counsel r has deep roots in society; is a p nal antecedents and, therefore, t tion of the petitioner. Learned s r is willing to join the investigati with evidence or influence any w s imposed in case he is enlarged submissions, the grant of co for.

certain property transactions on ingh @ Pushpinder Chaudhary unt(s) received in the bank accou e purpose of purchase of propert -accused and the petitioner hims m the transaction(s) except for contended that the investigation tures rather than on any tangi with the alleged offence. Learn ntire case is based on documenta transactions which are already d, therefore, custodial interrogati actual milieu of the case in hand of the petitioner has surfaced on co-accused persons and there is the petitioner with the alleg l has further submitted that permanent resident of the State; h there is no need for the custod senior counsel has asserted that ion as and when required, shall n witness and shall abide by all d on pre-arrest bail. On the streng oncession of anticipatory bail

. It unt ties self his n is ble ned ary in ion d. It nly ged has dial not gth

¶4anticipato petitioner well-plann running in the inves diverted f through th for the pu

08.07.202 Superinte Panchkula active par The relev Per contra, learned State c ory bail to the petitioner by argu r are serious involving large-sc ned economic offence involving nto several crores of rupees. Lea stigation has revealed that the from the accounts of Municipal C he account(s) connected with th urchase of various immovable p 26, by way of affidavit o ndent of Police, State Vigilan a, learned State counsel has su rticipant in layering and divers ant part of the said reply reads th "8 That the embezzled money accounts of Rajat Dahra Swati Sonia, Vinod, Kapil some main b Enterprises (Directors – Sunny G and other co-accused including Layer 2 as follows:-

Sr. No. Funds diverted to Debit A (Rs.)

¶1Sanat Enterprises & Allied entities 6974,700,2

¶2Swati Tomar 132,196,63

¶3Pushpinder

294.619.5

¶4Samar Mohan Ranga (Petitioner) 5,19,00,00 (Five cror nineteen la

¶5Aryan Singh 35,00,000

Total(Rs.) 1,211,416,

counsel has opposed the grant uing that the allegations against cale embezzlement and disclose g misappropriation of public fun arned State counsel has iterated t substantial amount(s) have be Corporation, Panchkula and rou he petitioner and thereafter utiliz properties. Referring to reply da of Bhartendra Kumar, Depu nce and Anti Corruption Bure ubmitted that the petitioner is sion of the proceeds of the crim hus: was further diverted illegally from Tomar SK Agro Tech SK Agro Fa beneficiaries into the accounts of Sa Garg and Priyanka Garg), Swati Tom g Samar Mohan Ranga (Petitioner) Amount Credit Amount (Rs.) Net Amo (Rs.)

230.10 30,350,000 667,350,230

639.70 5,938.621 126,258,018

507.24

211.307,000 83,312,507.2 res and acs)

5,19,00,000 20,900,000 14,100,000 6,377.04 268,495,621 942,920,756

of e a nds hat een ted zed ted uty eau, an me. arm, anat mar ) in ount

0.10

8.70

6.04

¶9That during investigation, Samar Mohan Ranga was hand i Tomar, Rajat Dahra etc. from t when one non-genuine/gorged b Sector – 11, Panchkula A/c No.2 Municipal Corporation, Panch

21.05.2020 and few months ther money (Rs.5,19,00,000/-) started (No.115110100006348 Union Ba Mohan Ranga and his wife Neh accused Kapil Kumar, Rajat Dah Agrotech (Director – Kulbir B (Director – Priyanka Raijada) o

12.12.2023 as shown in the follow

Sr. No. Account Holder Name Account N

¶1SK Agro Farms 658920110 (Bank of In

¶2SK Agro Tech 329920100 (Canara B

¶3SK Agro Tech 329920100 (Canara B

¶4SK Agro Tech 329920100 (Canara B

¶5Rajat Dahra 477015086 (ICICI Ban

¶6Kapil Kumar 100737949 (IDFC Ban

¶7Rajat Dahra 354100010

(PNB)

¶8Rajat Dahra 354100010

(PNB)

¶9Rajat Dahra 354100010

(PNB)

¶10Swati Tomar 118300010

(PNB)

it is revealed that the petitioner-accu in glove with accused Pushpinder, Sw the very initial stage of the conspir bank account (Kotak Mahindra Ba 2015073031) was opened in the name hkula by these accused persons reafter the above mentioned embezz being siphoned into the joined acco nk of India) of petitioner-accused Sam ha Samar Ranga from the accounts hra, Swati Tomar and firms namely – agri – demised) and SK Agro Far on various dates between 17.03.2021 wing table:- No. Date of Transaction Amount transferred the accou petitioner 0000242 India)

17.03.2021 20,00,000/- (Twenty lac 00347 Bank)

18.03.2021 20,00,000/- (Twenty lac 00347 Bank)

22.03.2021 20,00,000/- (Twenty lac 00347 Bank)

23.03.2021 10,00,000/- (Ten lacs) nk)

13.07.2021 91,00,000/- (Ninety lacs) nk)

31.07.2021 25,00,000/- (Twenty lacs) 08247140

24.09.2021 60,00,000/- (Sixty lacs) 08247140

02.11.2021 75,00,000/- (Seventy lacs) 08247140

20.11.2021 25,00,000/- (Twenty lacs) 01142310

29.11.2023 1,05,00,000 (One crore

used wati racy ank, e of on zled ount mar s of SK rms 1 to d in nt of /-cs) /-cs) /-cs) /-/-one /-Five /-) /-Five /-Five 0/-

Swati Tomar 118300010

(PNB)

Total

It is also relevant to m mentioned amount of Rs.5,19,00, from the petitioner-accused Sama

¶10That during the investiga persons including Dalip Ragha Dahra, Swati Tomar, Samar Moh have been arrested on various alongwith present status of their c

Sr. No. Name of Accused

¶1Dalip Raghav

¶2Rajat Dahra

¶3Kapil

¶4Vikash Kaushik

¶5Swati Tomar

¶6Pushpender Singh

¶7Sonia

¶8Priyanka Raijada

¶9Neha Samar Ranga

It is relevant to mentioned Kulbir Bagri (Proprietor/Directo have demised. Arrest of remaining Range (Petitioner), Aryan Singh Kumar and some officials of M Kotak Mahindra Bank involved in named accused Sunny Garg, Priy India and their LOC's have been by the answering respondent to ar

Five lacs) 01142310

12.12.2023 68,00,000/- (Sixty lacs) 5,19,00,000 (Five c and Nin lacs) mentioned here that recovery of ab 0,000/- (Five Crores and Nineteen la ar Mohan Ranga is still pending. ation conducted so far, total 09 accu av, Pushpender, Vikas Kaushik, Ra han Ranga (Petitioner), Kapil and othe dates as shown in the following ta custody Date of Arrest Present status custody

25.03.2026 In judicial custo

26.03.2026 In judicial custo

31.03.2026 In judicial custo

02.04.2026 In judicial custo

06.04.2026 In judicial custo

08.04.2026 In judicial custo

23.04.2026 In judicial custo

04.05.2026 In judicial custo

07.04.2026 In judicial custo d here that two accused persons namel or of SK Agro Tech) and Vinod Kum g accused persons namely Samar Moh h, Sunny Garg, Priyanka Garg, Sa Municipal Corporation, Panchkula a n the case is still remaining. The afo yanka Garg and Satish Kumar are ou n issued. Earnest efforts are being m rrest the aforesaid accused persons."

/- Eight 0/- crores neteen bove acs) used ajat ers, able of ody ody ody ody ody ody ody ody ody ly – mar han tish and ore-ut of

learned S numerous necessary relevant d that relea ongoing i influencin dismissal

¶5gone throu

¶6Hon'ble S Punjab, 2 Raising submissions in ta State counsel has contended tha s and complex for which custodi y to ascertain the money trail, documents and evidence. Learn asing the petitioner on bail at t investigation and potentially lea ng of witness(s). Accordingly, of the instant petition. I have heard the learned cou ugh the available record of the c It would be apposite to re Supreme Court titled as Devinde 2025 INSC 320, relevant whereo "21. The parameters for grant like corruption are required to granted only in exceptional circu of the view that the applicant has allegations are politically motivat hand is concerned, it cannot be s have been made out by the petit bail and there is no frivolity in the

¶22In the aforesaid context, Central Bureau of Investigation 7 Scale 15, wherein this Court exp "28. While granting bail, of accusation, the natur severity of the punishm character of the accused, accused, reasonable poss accused at the trial, rea

andem with the aforesaid rep at the transactions in question ial interrogation of the petitioner identify beneficiaries and recov ned State counsel has emphasiz this crucial stage may hamper ad to tampering with evidence a prayer has been made for unsel for the rival parties and ha case. efer herein to a judgment of er Kumar Bansal vs. The State of reads as under: of anticipatory bail in a serious offe o besatisfied. Anticipatory bail can mstances where the Court is prima fa been falsely enroped in the crime or ted or are frivolous. So far as the case said that any exceptional circumstan tioner accused for grant of anticipat e prosecution. we may refer to a pronouncement v. V. Vijay Sai Reddy reported in (20 pressed thus: the court has to keep in mind the nat re of evidence in support thereof, ment which conviction will entail, circumstances which are peculiar to sibility of securing the presence of asonable apprehension of the witnes

ply, are r is ver zed or ave e of ence be acie e at nces tory t in 013) ture

being tampered with, the other similar consideratio the purpose of granting b "reasonable grounds for which means the Court d satisfy it as to whether the and that the prosecution evidence in support of the to have the evidence estab reasonable doubt."

¶23The presumption of inn consideration for grant of an innocence is one of the consider mind while considering the plea f to balance the cause of the accus solicitous homage to the accuse cause of public justice.

¶24If liberty is to be denied society, then the courts should no overwhelming considerations in anticipatory bail, it has to be den say that once the investigation is may consider to grant regular indulging in corruption.

¶25Avarice is a common fra famous pronouncement that all m unsavoury cynicism that it sugges as more than two centuries ago, people generally corrupt, liberty Romain Rolland lamented that F without indignation. Corruption Corruption, a word of wide conn spheres of our day to day life, al allowing decisions and actions wrongs of acase but by the prosp considerations.

¶26If even a fraction of what of corruption to be true, then it w that it is the rampant corruptio

larger interests of the public/State a ons. It has also to be kept in mind that bail, the Legislature has used the wo r believing" instead of "the eviden dealing with the grant of bail can o ere is a genuine case against the accu n will be able to produce prima fa e charge. It is not expected, at this sta blishing the guilt of the accused beyo nocence, by itself, cannot be thes nticipatory bail. The presumption rations, which the court should keep for anticipatory bail. The salutary rul sed and the cause of public justice. O ed's liberty can, sometimes, defeat to an accused to ensure corruption f ot hesitate in denying such liberty. Wh the nature aforesaid require denial nied. It is altogether a different thing over and charge-sheet is filed, the co bail to a public servant - accused ailty of mankind and Robert Walpo men have their price, notwithstanding sts, is not very far from truth. As far b it was Burke who cautioned: "Amon cannot last long". In more recent yea France fell because there was corrupt has, in it, very dangerous potentialit notation has, in respect of almost all ll the world over, the limited meaning to be influenced not by the rights pects of monetary gains or other self was the vox pupuli about the magnit would not be far removed from the tru on indulged in with impunity by hig

and t for ords nce" only used acie age, ond sole of p in le is Over free here l of g to ourt d of ole's ack ng a ars, tion ties. g of or fish tude uth,

¶7prosecutio levelled a a large Corporati investigat through v immovabl an interm from the of investi into accou for purch members Pushpinde property merit acce facie ind connected thereto. W that can o placed persons that has led to ec asked to name one sole factor tha society to prosperity, undeniably developing country faces a mena hired assassins to its law and ord at the higher echelons of the Gove As per the material availabl on before this Court, indubitab against the petitioner. The allega scale financial fraud involvi on, Panchkula. The material tion prima facie reflects that various accounts and have been a le properties. The role attributed mediary in the alleged diversion accounts of Municipal Corporat igation, it has surfaced that sub unt(s) connected with the petiti hase of various immovable pr and associates of the main acc er Chaudhary. The contention dealer and acted on the instruc eptance at this stage, as the mate dicates that substantial amount d with the petitioner and pro Whether the petitioner acted kn only be determined after the com

conomic unrest in this country. If on at effectively arrested the progress of ly it is corruption. If the society in ace greater than even the one from der, then that is from the corrupt eleme ernment and of the political parties." le on record and the stand of bly, serious allegations have be ations in the present case pertain ing public funds of Munici collected during the course huge amounts were transferr allegedly utilized for acquisition d to the petitioner is that he acted and utilization of funds siphon tion, Panchkula. During the cou bstantial amounts were transferr ioner and were, thereafter, utiliz roperties in the names of fam cused namely Pushpinder Singh n that the petitioner is merely ctions of the co-accused does n erial placed before the Court pri ts were routed through accou operties were purchased pursu nowingly or innocently is a mat mpletion of investigation/trial. It

e is our n a ents een n to pal of red n of d as ned urse red zed mily @ y a not ma unts ant tter

trite law t granted as offences.

¶8evidence complex nature an unearthed involving public adm and affec stringent investigat material c baseless.

¶9disputed cannot be upon the c considere hamper th shown, at been false has alread factors, in that the anticipatory bail is an ex s a matter of right particularly in The argument that the case does not persuade this Court as financial transactions require nd extent of the involvement of d only through a free and fair public funds have far-reachin ministration. Such offences are c ct public confidence in institu approach while considering a tion in the present case is at a collected during investigation ca

The plea of false implicati question of fact and involves e adjudicated upon at this stage. conclusion of the investigation o d opinion of this Court, granting he on-going investigation. No c t this stage, from which it can be ely implicated into the present dy declined the plea of the petiti ncluding the manner in which th

xtraordinary relief and is not to n cases involving serious econom e is based solely on documenta s the economic offences involvi detailed investigation. The ex f the petitioner can be effectiv investigation. Economic offenc ng consequences on society a committed with deliberate planni utions. Therefore, they require prayer for anticipatory bail. T a crucial stage. At this stage, annot be brushed aside as vague ion raised by the petitioner is appreciation of evidence, wh The same can only be adjudica or during the course of trial. In g anticipatory bail at this stage m cause nay plausible cause has be e deciphered that the petitioner h FIR. Furthermore, the trial Co ioner after considering the relev he name of the petitioner surfac

be mic ary ing xact ely ces and ing e a The e or s a ich ted may een has ourt ant

during inv plea forg safeguard ought to attributed deeper an stage, the made out the prelim accusation petitioner investigat 1039, the

¶10and the g vestigation. It is befitting to men grant of anticipatory bail, the C ding individual rights and protec reckon with the magnitude an d to the accused; the need for fai nd wider impact of such alleged ere is no material on record to h against the petitioner. The mate minary investigation, appear to e ns. Thus, it is not appropriate r, as it would necessarily tion. In State v. Anil Sharma, (1 Hon'ble Supreme Court held as "6. We find force in the submissi qualitatively more elicitation-orie well-ensconced with a favourable a case like this, effective inter tremendous advantage in disinter materials which would have interrogation would elude if the protected and insulated by a pre interrogated. Very often interroga a mere ritual. The argument tha with the danger of the person b need not be countenanced, for, su accused in all criminal cases. Th police officers would conduct th would not conduct themselves as o In the present case, the inve grant of anticipatory bail at this

ntion here that while considerin Court has to equilibrate betwe cting societal interests. The Co nd nature of the offence; the r ir and free investigation as also d iniquities on the society. At t hold that a prima facie case is n erial which has come on record a establish a reasonable basis for to grant anticipatory bail to cause impediment in effect 1997) 7 SCC 187 : 1997 SCC (C under : (SCC p. 189, para 6) ion of CBI that custodial interrogation ented than questioning a suspect who e order under Section 438 of the Code rrogation of a suspected person is rring many useful informations and a been concealed. Success in s suspected person knows that he is w e-arrest bail order during the time he ation in such a condition would reduce at the custodial interrogation is frau being subjected to third-degree meth uch an argument can be advanced by he Court has to presume that responsi hemselves in task of disintering offen offenders." estigation is still at a crucial sta juncture will impede the fair a

g a een ourt role this not and ive Cri) n is o is e. In s of also uch well e is e to ught ods y all ible nces age

effective allegation necessity considere anticipato

11.

(i)

(ii) of opinion

(iii)

July 17, 2 Ajay

investigation. Considering the ns, the specific role assigned, the of custodial interrogation of th d opinion that the petitioner do ory bail in the factual milieu of th In view of the prevenient rati The instant petition is devoid Nothing said hereinabove sh n upon merits of the case/investig Pending application(s), if any

2026

e nature and seriousness of e stage of investigation as also he petitioner, this Court is of oes not deserve the concession he case in hand. iocination, it is ordained thus: d of merits and is hereby dismiss hall be deemed to be an expressi gation. y, shall also stand disposed off. (SUMEET GOEL)

JUDGE

of sed.