Navdeep Singh And Anr vs State Of Haryana

CRM-M-37580-2026 (O & M)
1
:: ::
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
(209)
CRM-M-37580-2026 (O & M)
Date of decision: 11.11.2026
Navdeep Singh and anr. …... Petitioners
V/s
State of Haryana ...Respondent
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI
Present: Mr. Aman Pal, Sr. Advocate,
with Mr. Japsehaj Singh, Advocate,
for the petitioners.
Ms. Diya Sodhi, Sr. DAG, Haryana.

JASJIT SINGH BEDI, J. (Oral)
The prayer in the present petition under Section 482 BNSS
(Section 438 Cr.P.C.) is for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners in
case FIR No.153 dated 06.05.2026 under Sections 406, 420 and 120-B IPC
(Sections 316, 318(4) and 61(2) BNS) registered at Police Station Sadar
Pehowa, Kurukshetra.
2. The present FIR came to be registered at the instance of
Lavneesh Arora, Food and Supply PR Incharge, Kharif Year 2023-24,
Pehowa and reads as under:-
Sir, the copy of the application is as under:-
Sender: Food and Supply PR Incharge, Kharif Year 2023-24,
Pehowa. To, The Station House Officer, Sadar Police Station,
Pehowa.
Memo No.: ISFS-2026/74 Dated: 01.05.2026
SUKHPREET KAUR
2026.11.12 12:54
I agree to specified
portions of this document

CRM-M-37580-2026 (O & M)
2
:: ::
Subject: Regarding getting an F.I.R. registered against the rice
mill owner of defaulting M/s SBS Rice Land Private Limited,
Pehowa, District Kurukshetra, and its guarantors, for Kharif
Year 2023-24. Reference: In compliance with the letter of the
District Circle Office, Kurukshetra, Memo No. Clerk-3-
2026/1145 dated 01.05.2026.
Regarding the subject cited above, it is respectfully written to
you that during Kharif Year 2023-24, M/s SBS Rice Land
Private Limited, Pehowa Centre, had got online Pehowa,
registration done in the District Office for allotment of paddy
for milling work. After its approval was got done from the
Hon'ble Deputy Commissioner Sir and Chairman, District
Milling Committee, Kurukshetra, 64993.12500 quintals of
paddy was allotted to the mill for milling work along with
agreement, as per the instructions of the policy, out of which
43545.3938 quintals of rice at the rate of 67 percent was to be
sent to the Food Corporation of India, but the above said miller
has sent only 24660.1560 quintals of rice to the Food
Corporation of India. The balance 18885.2378 quintals of rice
is pending to be sent to the Food Corporation of India. Now,
recovery of the remaining 18885.2378 quintals of rice is liable
to be made from the concerned miller as per policy.
Regarding the paddy allotment, the miller deposited in the
Circle Office, Kurukshetra, on its letter pad/undertaking dated
13.12.2023, the certificate of receipt and quality of
64993.12500 quintals of paddy. The physical inspection of the
paddy allotted to the miller up to dated 27.10.2023 was
conducted on dated 27.10.2023 by the constituted committee,
namely Food Corporation of India, HAFED, Food Department,
wherein stock was found correct, copy attached. Thereafter, on
dated 25.12.2023, the physical inspection the of the paddy and
SUKHPREET KAUR
2026.11.12 12:54
I agree to specified
portions of this document
rice allotted to the miller was conducted by the team constituted

CRM-M-37580-2026 (O & M)
3
:: ::
under the chairmanship of the Hon'ble City Magistrate,
Kurukshetra, wherein the stock was found correct. After the
physical inspection, the miller had started giving delivery of
rice to the Food Corporation of India.
On account of the miller not giving CMR as per the paddy
policy, notices, attached, were issued by the Department from
time to time, but the miller neither submitted any satisfactory
reply. The final date for delivery of CMR was fixed by the
Government as 30.06.2024, but the miller did not complete the
CMR delivery even up to dated 30.06.2024.
Thereafter, the date of CMR delivery was extended up to
31.07.2024 by the letter of the Directorate, Chandigarh, RP-2-
2024/10303 dated 09.07.2024, but despite repeated notices
being issued to the said miller, 100 percent delivery of of CMR
was not completed even up to the extended date 31.07.2024.
During this period, on dated 26.07.2024, the physical
inspection the balance rice kept in the mill was conducted by
the team constituted under the chairmanship of the Sub-
Divisional Officer (Civil), wherein the stock was found correct.
Thereafter, by Government letter RP-2-2024/RA 174 dated
14.08.2024, the delivery of CMR was again extended up to
dated 31.08.2024, but despite repeated notices being issued to
the miller and the guarantors, 100 percent delivery of CMR was
not completed even up to the extended date 31.08.2024.
Thereafter, while providing the final opportunity, by the
Directorate, Chandigarh letter No. RP-2-2024/13037 dated
04.09.2024, the final date for CMR delivery was extended up to
dated 30.09.2024, but despite repeated notices being issued to
the miller and the guarantors, 100 percent delivery of CMR was
not completed by the miller even up to extended date
30.09.2024.
SUKHPREET KAUR
2026.11.12 12:54
I agree to specified
portions of this document

CRM-M-37580-2026 (O & M)
4
:: ::
Meanwhile, the miller filed a case in the District Court,
Kurukshetra, on dated 20.09.2024, which was dismissed by the
Hon'ble Court on dated 30.09.2024 while deciding in favour of
the Department. On dated 30.09.2024, the miller gave written
request Circle Office, Kurukshetra, on his letter
pad/undertaking, that a in the he is ready to deposit the full
amount of the balance CMR rice and that no administrative
action be taken against him. Thereafter, the said miller
deposited the amount xxx illegible xxx
Xxx was orally told several times in this regard to deposit the
amount of the balance rice.
Thereafter, on dated 01.03.2025, the miller again gave a written
request in the Circle Office on letter pad/undertaking that he is
ready to deposit the principal amount of paddy, and in lieu of
the same, several cheques were given. On account of non-
deposit of the amount of the balance rice, a notice was issued
by the Circle Office letter Memo No. Clerk-4-2025/2494 dated
21.03.2025. After this, on dated 29.10.2025, by the Circle
Office letter No. Clerk-3-2025/3439 miller and the written
dated 29.10.2025 also, concerned guarantors the were to for
depositing the recovery amount, but the miller and the
guarantors did not deposit the balance recovery amount in the
Circle Office.
The said miller was issued a Show Cause Notice by the Circle
Office letter Memo No. Clerk-3-2026/6070 dated 10.03.2026
while providing the final opportunity. Thereafter, on dated
22.04.2026, the miller deposited only an amount of Rs. 5 lakh in
the Department, which is negligible in comparison to the total
recovery amount. The miller did not give any information to the
Circle Office regarding paddy/rice, nor was the full recovery
amount of the balance CMR deposited. From this, it appears
SUKHPREET KAUR
2026.11.12 12:54
I agree to specified
portions of this document
that the said miller has misappropriated the balance

CRM-M-37580-2026 (O & M)
5
:: ::
paddy/rice, due to which the Department has suffered a
financial loss of approximately Rs. 8,04,11,175/- along with
interest.
Therefore, it is requested that an F.I.R. be registered against the
said mill owner Shri Navdeep Singh son of Jitenderpal Singh,
village Hamira Farm, Saina Sainda, Pehowa; and owner
Jagmal Singh son of Shri Anokh Singh, village Udo Nangal,
Tehsil Baba Bakala, District Amritsar, Punjab; and guarantor
M/s K.K. Enterprises, owner Ramphal son of Shri Tek Chand,
village Ratrgarh Kakrauli, Pehowa, District Kurukshetra: and
guarantor Gurdeep Trading Company, owner Shri Gurvinder
Singh son of Shri Gurdeep Singh, village Karah Sahib, District
Kurukshetra; and other guarantor M/s Randhawa Rice Mill,
owner Shri Amritpal Singh son of Makhan Singh, village Saina
Sainda, District Kurukshetra.
Attached: 72 pages certified copies.
Sd/- Lavneesh Arora Inspector, Food and Supply PR Incharge,
Kharif Year 2023-24, Pehowa. (Lavneesh Arora) Endst. No.
IFS-2026 / dated 01.05.2026
3. The learned Senior counsel for the petitioners contends that the
petitioners have been falsely implicated in the present case. The FIR itself
records that multiple physical verifications of the stock have taken place on
multiple occasions by duly constituted Committees and no short-fall has
been found. The petitioners had themselves submitted an undertaking that
they were ready and willing to make good the loss, in furtherance of which
they, lastly, deposited an amount of Rs.5 lacs on 22.04.2026 with the
Department. In fact, arbitration proceedings were also withdrawn on the
SUKHPREET KAUR
2026.11.12 12:54
I agree to specified
portions of this document
grounds that the matter had been settled between the parties. Be that as it

CRM-M-37580-2026 (O & M)
6
:: ::
may, non-delivery of the remaining quantity of CMR (Custome Milled
Rice) and the alleged failure to clear the amount due would entail civil
liability at best. Breach of contractual obligations would not amount to the
commission of criminal offences. In fact, property worth Crores stands
mortgaged with the Department. It is a case wherein, on account of
deterioration of the rice, the same was disposed of in various locations
because of which there was some short-fall. As the petitioners are ready and
willing to join the investigation, they are entitled to the concession of
anticipatory bail.
4. The learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, while
referring to the reply dated 22.07.2026 which is already on record, contends
that, though, the initial physical verifications that were conducted led to no
shortfall being found in the stock of Custome Milled Rice (CMR) but later, a
shortfall of CMR was found, leading to the issuance of various notices and
initiation of civil proceedings against the petitioners. They undertook to
make good the loss. Though, some amount was paid, an amount of
Rs.8,04,11,175/- remains to be paid on account of non-supply of CMR. It is
not a case of mere breach of contractual obligations, but a case where prima
facie offences under Sections 406, 420 and 120-B IPC (Section 318(4),
316(5) and 61(2) BNS) are made out. The explanation furnished by the
petitioners that the rice had deteriorated in quality because of which it had
been disposed of, has been found to be incorrect during the course of the
investigation and spot verification. As the offences are made out and the
SUKHPREET KAUR
2026.11.12 12:54
I agree to specified
portions of this document
investigation is to be taken to its logical conclusion inasmuch as the

CRM-M-37580-2026 (O & M)
7
:: ::
recovery of the misappropriated Government rice is to be effected or its
equivalent value realized, the manner in which the stock was
misappropriated or disposed of is to be ascertained and the names of the
other accused are required to be ascertained, the custodial interrogation of
the petitioners is certainly necessary. Therefore, the present petition is liable
to be dismissed.
5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.
6. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ‘Sumitha Pradeep
Vs. Arun Kumar C.K. & Anr. 2022(4) RCR (Criminal) 977’, has held that
merely because custodial interrogation was not required by itself could not
be a ground to grant anticipatory bail. The first and the foremost thing the
Court hearing the anticipatory bail application is to consider is the prima
facie case against the accused. The relevant extract of the judgment is
reproduced hereinbelow:-
“It may be true, as pointed out by learned counsel
appearing for Respondent No.1, that charge-sheet has already
been filed. It will be unfair to presume on our part that the
Investigating Officer does not require Respondent No.1 for
custodial interrogation for the purpose of further investigation.
Be that as it may, even assuming it a case where
Respondent No.1 is not required for custodial interrogation, we
are satisfied that the High Court ought not to have granted
discretionary relief of anticipatory bail.
We are dealing with a matter wherein the original
complainant (appellant herein) has come before this Court
praying that the anticipatory bail granted by the High Court to
SUKHPREET KAUR
2026.11.12 12:54
I agree to specified
portions of this document
the accused should be cancelled. To put it in other words, the

CRM-M-37580-2026 (O & M)
8
:: ::
complainant says that the High Court wrongly exercised its
discretion while granting anticipatory bail to the accused in a
very serious crime like POCSO and, therefore, the order passed
by the High Court granting anticipatory bail to the accused
should be quashed and set aside. In many anticipatory bail
matters, we have noticed one common argument being
canvassed that no custodial interrogation is required and,
therefore, anticipatory bail may be granted. There appears to
be a serious misconception of law that if no case for custodial
interrogation is made out by the prosecution, then that alone
would be a good ground to grant anticipatory bail. Custodial
interrogation can be one of the relevant aspects to be
considered along with other grounds while deciding an
application seeking anticipatory bail. There may be many
cases in which the custodial interrogation of the accused may
not be required, but that does not mean that the prima facie
case against the accused should be ignored or overlooked and
he should be granted anticipatory bail. The first and foremost
thing that the court hearing an anticipatory bail application
should consider is the prima facie case put up against the
accused. Thereafter, the nature of the offence should be
looked into along with the severity of the punishment.
Custodial interrogation can be one of the grounds to decline
custodial interrogation. However, even if custodial
interrogation is not required or necessitated, by itself, cannot
be a ground to grant anticipatory bail .”
7. The relevant extract of the State reply dated 22.07.2026 filed by
way of an affidavit of Randhir Singh, HPS, DSP, Pehowa, Kurukshetra is as
under:-
SUKHPREET KAUR
2026.11.12 12:54
I agree to specified
portions of this document

CRM-M-37580-2026 (O & M)
9
:: ::
20) Thereafter, the details and charts supplied by the Food and
Supplies Department regarding the outstanding stock and
recoverable amount were examined and incorporated into the
investigation record. That the quantum of loss caused to the
State exchequer, as assessed by the Food and Supply
Department, is set out below:-
Calculation of Total Amount due against M/s SBS Land Pvt Ltd
Pehowa KMS 2023-24
SR Particulars
1
Total Paddy Allotted (in Qtls) 64993.1250 Quintal
2
CMR Due 67% 43545.3938 Quintal
3
CMR Delivered to FCI 24660.1560 Quintal
4
Balance Rice 18885.2378 Quintal
5
Principal Amount of Balance CMR 67087919 Rupees
@3552.40 per Qtls
6
Amount of Balance CMR @110% Rs.
3907.64 Per Qtis (as per Agreement
Clause 7(iv) of-Paddy-Policy 2023)
73796710 Rupees
Rupees
Total Adjustable Amount in Bills Mill
and Guarantors Approx
7
Rupees
Balance Amount Recoverable 73796710
8
Interest w.e.f. (01-10-2024 to 28-02-
2026) (as per) Agreement Clause 7(iv)
of Paddy Policy 2023)
Rupees
11541420
9
Rupees
Net Recoverable Amount as on 28-02- 85338130
2026
10
Rupees
Amount Deposited by Rice Millers as 4926955
on 18-10-2024
11
Balance Recoverable Amount 80411175 Rupees
21) It transpired during investigation that accused Navdeep
Singh, son of Shri Jitender Pal Singh, resident of Village
Hamira Farm, Saiyana Saiyanda, Tehsil Pehowa, District
SUKHPREET KAUR
2026.11.12 12:54
I agree to specified
portions of this document

CRM-M-37580-2026 (O & M)
10
:: ::
Kurukshetra, and accused Jagmail Singh, son of Shri Anokh
Singh, resident of Village Udo Nagal, Tehsil Baba Bakala,
District Amritsar, Punjab, had filed an application seeking
anticipatory bail before the Court of the Learned Additional
Sessions Judge, Kurukshetra. Vide order dated 15.05.2026, the
Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kurukshetra, granted
interim anticipatory bail to the aforesaid accused persons and
directed them to join investigation. The Investigating Agency
was further directed to submit a status report on 25.05.2026.
22) All the aforesaid documents were taken into police
possession vide a duly prepared seizure memo (Fard
Possession). The seizure memo was signed by the producing
witness and the attesting witnesses. Statements of the concerned
witnesses were also recorded under the relevant provisions of
law. Thereafter, the details and charts supplied by the Food and
Supplies Department regarding the outstanding stock and
recoverable amount were examined and incorporated into the
investigation record. It transpired during investigation that
accused Navdeep Singh, son of Shri Jitender Pal Singh, resident
of Village Hamira Farm, Saiyana Saiyanda, Tehsil Pehowa,
District Kurukshetra, and accused Jagmail Singh, son of Shri
Anokh Singh, resident of Village Udo Nagal, Tehsil Baba
Bakala, District Amritsar, Punjab, had filed an application
seeking anticipatory bail before the Court of the Learned
Additional Sessions Judge, Kurukshetra. Vide order dated
15.05.2026, the Learned Additional Sessions Judge,
Kurukshetra, granted interim anticipatory bail to the aforesaid
accused persons and directed them to join investigation. The
Investigating agency was further directed to submit a status
report on 25.05.2026. Accordingly, on 22.05.2026, accused
Navdeep Singh and Jagmel Singh joined the investigation and
SUKHPREET KAUR
2026.11.12 12:54
I agree to specified
portions of this document
were interrogated in the presence of the complainant, Shri

CRM-M-37580-2026 (O & M)
11
:: ::
Lavnish Arora, Inspector, Food and Supplies Department, PR
Incharge, KMS 2023-24. During interrogation, both accused
persons failed to cooperate with the investigation and allegedly
concealed material facts relating to the whereabouts of the
misappropriated rice stock. They neither furnished satisfactory
information regarding the undelivered rice nor facilitated
recovery of the amount assessed by the Department, which was
stated to be approximately Rs.8,04,11,175/-. In view of the
aforesaid circumstances, a detailed status report was submitted
before the Hon'ble Court on 25.05.2026. Upon consideration
thereof, the Hon'ble Court extended the interim protection
granted to accused Navdeep Singh and Jagmel Singh till
01.07.2026 and directed the accused persons to continue
joining the investigation and to assist in the identification of the
places where the rice allegedly entrusted under the Government
milling scheme had been disposed of. Thereafter, on
29.05.2026, correspondence was made with the Food and
Supplies Department requesting constitution of an expert team
for the purpose of identification and verification of the alleged
disposal sites. In response, vide Letter No. 1751 dated
03.06.2026, the Food and Supplies Department constituted the
following committee:


Shri Jasbir Singh, Assistant Food and Supplies Officer
Chairman;


Shri Rinku Jangra, Inspector, Food and Supplies
Department, PR Centre, Pehowa - Member;


Shri Narendra Rai Gupta, Chief Analyst, Food Grain
Laboratory, Kurukshetra - Member; and


Shri Lavnish Kumar Arora, Inspector, Food and Supplies
Department, Jhansa - Member.
23) Subsequently, notices dated 08.06.2026 were issued to
accused Navdeep Singh and Jagmel Singh directing them to
join further investigation. On 08.06.2026, the aforesaid
SUKHPREET KAUR
2026.11.12 12:54
I agree to specified
portions of this document

CRM-M-37580-2026 (O & M)
12
:: ::
committee constituted W by the Food and Supplies Department,
along with the Scene of Crime Team and the Investigating
Agency, conducted spot inspections pursuant to the disclosure
and identification made by accused Navdeep Singh. During
investigation and in the course of spot verification, accused
Navdeep Singh disclosed that after extracting rice from the
paddy allotted by the Government Department, a portion of the
rice had allegedly deteriorated and was subsequently disposed
of at various locations during the year 2025. Pursuant to the
said disclosure, accused Navdeep Singh led the police party, the
expert committee and the Scene of Crime Team to a location
situated near the track of water stream (Rajbaha), within the
area of Village Hamira Farm, Saiyana Saiyanda, adjacent to
M/s SBS Rice Land Private Limited, and pointed out the place
where, according to him, quantity of spoiled rice had been
discarded. The said spot was identified and marked as Point 'A'.
A separate pointing-out memo was prepared, duly signed by the
accused and the witnesses. A site inspection was conducted and
a rough site plan along with a pointing-out report pertaining to
Point 'A' was prepared.
24) Thereafter, accused Navdeep Singh led the police party and
the expert committee to another location situated near the
Pehowa Drain on Cheeka Road, towards the track of the
Morthali Drain, Satoda side, and disclosed that a substantial
quantity of spoiled rice had allegedly been thrown into the
drain during the year 2025. The said place was identified and
marked as Point B. A separate pointing-out memo was prepared
and signed by the accused and witnesses. After inspection of the
site, a site plan and pointing-out report relating to Point 'B'
were prepared and incorporated into the case file.
25) Subsequently, accused Navdeep Singh led the investigating
SUKHPREET KAUR
2026.11.12 12:54
I agree to specified
portions of this document
team to pits situated behind the premises of M/s SBS Rice Land

CRM-M-37580-2026 (O & M)
13
:: ::
Private Limited, where wastewater and industrial residue from
the mill and boiler were allegedly discharged. The accused
disclosed that a portion of the spoiled rice had also been
thrown into the said pits during the year 2025. Upon reaching
the said location, the pits were excavated with the assistance of
a JCB machine in the presence of the expert committee, the
Scene of Crime Team and the investigating officials. The site
was inspected and documented. The said location was identified
and marked as Point 'C'. A separate pointing-out memo was
prepared and signed by the accused and witnesses. A site
inspection report and rough site plan of Point 'C' were also
prepared and made part of the investigation record.
26) Thereafter, a report was obtained from Ms. Kusum Rani,
Scientific Assistant (Scene of Crime), MFSU, Kurukshetra, In-
charge, Scene of Crime Team, who inspected the locations
identified by the accused persons. The report recorded the
following observations:


The first identified location comprised a drain and
adjoining agricultural fields situated near the rice mill of
the accused.


The second identified location was the Khalasi Drain,
Pehowa, situated approximately 200 metres from the
Pehowa-Cheeka Main Road.


The third identified location was situated behind the
premises of M/s SBS Rice Land Private Limited.


No physical evidence or material indicative of the alleged
disposal or concealment of rice was found at any of the
three locations inspected.


Spot photography and videography of all three locations
were conducted through the eSakshya Application.
(Copy of Crime scene visit report i.e. FSL Madhuban, Karnal is
attached herewith Annexure R-1 for the kind perusal of this
Hon'ble Court)
27) During investigation, another report was also received from
the Expert Committee constituted by the Food and Supplies
SUKHPREET KAUR
2026.11.12 12:54
I agree to specified
portions of this document

CRM-M-37580-2026 (O & M)
14
:: ::
Department vide Letter No. IFS-2026/SPL-1 dated 08.06.2026,
constituted pursuant to Letter No. Clerk-3-2026/1750 dated
03.06.2026 issued by the Circle Office. The said report reveals
that on 08.06.2026, officers of the Economic Offences Branch,
Kurukshetra, officials of the Forensic Science Laboratory,
Madhuban, Haryana, and members of the Food and Supplies
Department, in the presence of accused Navdeep Singh,
proprietor of M/s SBS Rice Land Private Limited, inspected the
three locations identified by the accused, namely:
(a) the drain situated near the rice mill;
(b) the Khalasi Drain situated approximately 200 metres
from the Pehowa-Cheeka Main Road; and
(c) the area situated behind the rice mill.
28) The report further records that excavation was carried out
with the assistance of a JCB machine at the location situated
behind the rice mill. The drain adjoining the rice mill as well as
the Khalasi Drain were also thoroughly inspected. However, no
physical evidence whatsoever was found at any of the aforesaid
locations to substantiate the allegation that any quantity of
Government paddy or rice had been buried or disposed of at
those places. (True translated copy of Inspection report of
committee constituted by the Food and Supplies Department is
attached herewith Annexure R-2 for the kind perusal of this
Hon'ble Court)
29) During further investigation on 25.06.2026, certified bank
account statements along with certificates under the applicable
provisions of law relating to electronic records were obtained in
respect of the following accounts:


Bank Account No. 4075002100006580 standing in the
name of M/s SBS Rice Land Private Limited for the
period 01.10.2023 to 01.10.2025; and


Bank Account No. 619302010006736 standing in the
name of Navdeep Singh, son of Shri Jitender Pal Singh,
SUKHPREET KAUR
2026.11.12 12:54
I agree to specified
portions of this document

CRM-M-37580-2026 (O & M)
15
:: ::
C/o Chahal Enterprises, Shop No. 14, New Grain
Market, Pehowa, for the period 01.10.2023 to
01.10.2025.
(Copy of Bank Statement of M/s SBS Rice Land Pvt Ltd. is
attached herewith Annexure R-3 for the kind perusal of this
Hon'ble Court)
30) Upon scrutiny of the bank statements, it was revealed that
substantial financial transactions amounting to several crores
of rupees had taken place in the account of M/s SBS Rice Land
Private Limited. The account reflected receipt of funds from
various business entities, including: JN Traders; Maa Mansa;
Jai Bholenath; Shri Vitrag Extractions; M/s Guru Nanak Agro
Foods; Pankaj Overseas; Ishira Overseas; Puran Trading;
Sarthi Overseas; Riddhi Foods; Chahal Enterprises; and Ridhi
Sidhi Rice Mill.
31) The investigation further disclosed that substantial amounts
had been transferred from the accounts of the aforesaid traders
into the account of M/s SBS Rice Land Private Limited.
Consequently, the proprietors/authorized representatives of the
aforesaid trading concerns were associated with the
investigation, and inquiry regarding the nature and purpose of
the said financial transactions is presently under progress.
It is the case of the prosecution that throughout the course of
investigation, accused Navdeep Singh and Jagmail Singh failed
to cooperate with the Investigating Agency and deliberately
suppressed material facts. Despite repeated opportunities, they
neither disclosed. the whereabouts of the allegedly
misappropriated rice nor facilitated recovery of the amount
assessed by the Department, which is approximately
Rs.8,04,11,175/-.
33) It is further submitted that the Hon'ble Court had
SUKHPREET KAUR
2026.11.12 12:54
I agree to specified
portions of this document
specifically directed the Investigating Agency to verify the

CRM-M-37580-2026 (O & M)
16
:: ::
locations where the accused alleged that the Government rice
had been disposed of. Pursuant to the said directions, the Scene
of Crime Team, along with the Expert Committee constituted by
the Food and Supplies Department, conducted inspections at all
the locations identified by accused Navdeep Singh. However, no
material evidence whatsoever was found to support the claim
that Government rice had been dumped, buried or otherwise
disposed of at the identified sites. The reports of the Expert
Committee and the Scene of Crime Team form part of the
investigation record.
34) The Investigating Agency has further stated that custodial
interrogation of accused Navdeep Singh and Jagmail Singh is
necessary for the following purposes:


Recovery of the allegedly misappropriated Government
rice or its equivalent value;


Recovery of the outstanding amount of approximately
Rs.8,04,11,175/-, as assessed by the Food and Supplies
Department;


Identification of the actual manner in which the entrusted
Government stock was allegedly misappropriated or
disposed of; and Thorough investigation into the
substantial financial transactions reflected in the bank
accounts of M/s SBS Rice Land Private Limited,
particularly the funds received from various traders and
business entities, and to ascertain whether such
transactions have any nexus with the alleged offences
under investigation.
35) That during investigation, it also came to light that accused
Navdeep Singh, son of Shri Jitender Pal Singh, had furnished
the guarantee of Chaudhary Rice Mill, Neemwala, before the
Food and Supplies Department. In relation thereto, FIR No. 79
dated 17.03.2026, under Sections 318(4) and 316(5) of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, stands registered at Police
Station Sadar, Pehowa, and the said fact has also been taken
SUKHPREET KAUR
2026.11.12 12:54
I agree to specified
portions of this document

CRM-M-37580-2026 (O & M)
17
:: ::
into consideration during the investigation, hence having
similar criminal antecedents of the present petitioner.
In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the
Investigating Agency prayed before the Hon'ble Court that the
application for anticipatory bail filed by accused / petitioners
Navdeep Singh and Jagmail Singh, be dismissed, as their
custodial interrogation was stated to be essential for effective
investigation and recovery of the Government property and
public money involved in the case. It is most respectfully prayed
that the present petition may kindly be dismissed, being devoid
of merit, in the interest of justice.
8. As per the investigation conducted so far, the quantum of loss
caused to the State exchequer by not supplying CMR as assessed by the
Food and Supplies Department is Rs.8,04,11,175/-. The petitioners had
agreed to make good the loss but have failed to do so. When they had
sought the concession of anticipatory bail before the Sessions Court, their
arrest had been stayed. They joined investigation and disclosed that sub-
standard rice had been disposed of them. On an investigation being
conducted, the defence raised by the petitioners has been found to be
incorrect. It is not merely a case of breach of contractual obligations but
apparently, the allegations clearly establish the commission of the offences
under Sections 406, 420 and 120-B IPC (Section 318(4), 316(5) and 61(2)
BNS).
9. As the offence is prima facie established and the custodial
interrogation of the petitioners is required to recover the misappropriated
SUKHPREET KAUR
2026.11.12 12:54
I agree to specified
portions of this document

CRM-M-37580-2026 (O & M)
18
:: ::
Government rice and ascertain the manner in which the fraud was
perpetrated, the question of grant of anticipatory bail does not arise.
10. Therefore, I find no merits in the present petition and the same
stands dismissed.
11. However, it is made clear that the observations made in this
order are only for the purpose of deciding this bail application and the Trial
Court is free to adjudicate upon the matter on the basis of the evidence led
before it uninfluenced by any such observations made.
12. The pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of
accordingly.
November 11, 2026 ( JASJIT SINGH BEDI)
sukhpreet JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
SUKHPREET KAUR
2026.11.12 12:54
I agree to specified
portions of this document