Vikas Sharma vs State Of Punjab
- Court
- Punjab and Haryana High Court
CRM-M-48552-2026 1
269
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-48552-2026
DECIDED ON: 03.09.2026
VIKAS SHARMA .....PETITIONER
VERSUS
STATE OF PUNJAB .....RESPONDENT
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH.
Present: Mr. Suvir Sidhu, Advocate, and
Mr. Ashutosh Gupta, Advocate,
for the petitioner(s).
Mr. Neeraj Madaan, Sr. DAG, Punjab.
SANJAY VASHISTH , J (ORAL)
1. Present petition has been filed under Section 528 of the
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (erstwhile Section 482 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973), seeking modification of a condition
imposed vide order dated 17.08.2026 (Annexure P-12) passed by learned
Additional Sessions Judge, Mohali, arising out of FIR No. 10 dated
21.06.2019, registered under Sections 409, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 and
120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Sections 316(5), 318(4), 336(2),
338, 336(3) and 340(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023], and Sections
7 and 13(1)(A), read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption
Act, 1988, registered at Police Station Vigilance Bureau, Flying Squad,
Mohali, District Mohali.
LAVISHA
2026.09.08 18:59
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
PHHC, Chandigarh
CRM-M-48552-2026 2
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that vide order
dated 17.08.2026 (Annexure P-12), passed by learned Additional
Sessions Judge, Mohali, application filed by the petitioner seeking
permission to travel abroad was allowed, whereby petitioner was granted
permission to visit United Kingdom (UK) from 19.08.2026 to
10.01.2027, subject to the following conditions:-
“1. He shall furnish personal bonds to the tune of
Rs. One crore with one surety or FDR or bank
guarantee, whichever is available, in the like amount
before this court.
2. He is directed to furnish his correct and
complete address of his stay in United Kingdom (UK)
before this court.
3. He is also directed to supply his operational
mobile number which shall be operational in United
Kingdom (UK) and he is also directed to supply his
mail I.D. if any, to this court.
4. He is also directed to supply the photostat
attested copy of the complete passport having visa of
United Kingdom (UK) to this court.
5. He will not change his counsel without
permission of the Court.
6. The applicant shall furnish the list of
immovable assets/ properties, if any, on an affidavit in
the court.
7. The applicant shall return from United
Kingdom (UK) on or before 10.01.2027 and mark his
presence before the court.”
LAVISHA
2026.09.08 18:59
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
PHHC, Chandigarh
CRM-M-48552-2026 3
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, while
satisfying itself with regard to the conduct of the petitioner, learned trial
Court recorded a finding that, on an earlier occasion also, petitioner had
travelled abroad only after obtaining permission from Hon’ble High
Court and had thereafter returned to India within the stipulated period.
4. Learned counsel further submits that Condition No.1,
[reproduced here above and incorporated in paragraph No.4 of the order
dated 17.08.2026 (Annexure P-12)], cannot be complied with by the
petitioner in its present form, as he has been directed to furnish a personal
bond in the sum of Rs.1 crore with one surety, or an FDR/bank guarantee
of an equivalent amount. It is submitted that the amount so stipulated is
excessively onerous, particularly keeping in view the short period for
which permission to travel abroad has been granted. Therefore, the said
condition cannot practically be complied with, unless the amount
stipulated therein is substantially reduced.
5. Per contra, learned State counsel submits that Condition
No.1 imposed by learned trial Court is neither unreasonable nor onerous;
rather, the same has been imposed to ensure petitioner's return to India
and his availability for smooth conduct of the trial and for enabling him
to join the proceedings before the trial Court at the earliest. Accordingly,
dismissal of the present petition is prayed for.
6. This Court has heard learned counsel for the parties and has
also gone through the record available before it.
LAVISHA
2026.09.08 18:59
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
PHHC, Chandigarh
CRM-M-48552-2026 4
7. Undoubtedly, petitioner had travelled abroad on an earlier
occasion as well; however, the said concession was never misused by
him. His personal appearance had also been exempted by this Court on
an earlier occasion. At the same time, the amount of Rs.1 crore stipulated
towards the personal bond with surety/FDR/bank guarantee is, in the
considered view of this Court, rather onerous and, therefore, warrants
suitable reduction.
8. This Court has also considered the overall circumstances of
the case, including the defence raised by the petitioner that he was not a
Director of the company at the time when the alleged fraud was
committed, as he had already resigned from the company, vide e-mail
dated 18.08.2016 (Annexure P-3), on account of his deteriorating health.
It is also not the case of the respondent-State that petitioner was ever an
authorised signatory or had any legal authority under the Joint Venture
Agreement dated 04.05.2009.
9. Be that as it may, having regard to the previous conduct of
the petitioner, which has remained unblemished as his earlier travel
abroad is concerned, and taking into consideration the submissions
advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court finds sufficient
grounds to suitably relax Condition No.1 imposed by learned trial Court.
10. Accordingly, in view of the circumstances detailed and
discussed here above, Condition No.1 imposed by learned trial Court
vide order dated 17.08.2026 (Annexure P-12) is modified to the extent
LAVISHA
2026.09.08 18:59
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
PHHC, Chandigarh
CRM-M-48552-2026 5
that the amount of Rs.1 crore stipulated therein, shall be read as Rs.25
lakhs. Consequently, Condition No.1 shall now be read as under:-
“1. He shall furnish personal bonds to the tune of Rs. 25
lacs with one surety or FDR or bank guarantee, whichever is
available, in the like amount before this court.”
11. Needless to say, all other terms and conditions incorporated
in the impugned order dated 17.08.2026 (Annexure P-12) shall remain
the same and continue to operate as such.
12. With the observations made here above, present petition
stands disposed of.
(SANJAY VASHISTH)
03.09.2026 JUDGE
Lavisha/reena
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether reportable Yes/No
LAVISHA
2026.09.08 18:59
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
PHHC, Chandigarh