Lovepreet Singh Alias Pamma v. State Of Punjab

CRM-M No.6270 of 2026 (O&M) -1110+217

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M No.6270 of 2026 (O&M) Date of Decision: 11.05.2026 Lovepreet Singh @ Pamma ..... Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab ..... Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ *****

Present:

Ms. Kamlesh, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Raj Karan Singh, Asstt. A.G., Punjab.

***** RAJESH BHARDWAJ, J. (ORAL) CRM-14584-2026 Allowed as prayed for. Copy of statement and translated copy of cross examination of PW-3 is ordered to be taken on record as Annexure P-5.

CRM-M-6270-2026 1.

Present second petition has been filed praying for the grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR No.122, dated 18.05.2022, under Sections 420 and 408 of IPC, 1860, registered at Police Station City-I Malerkotla, District Malerkotla.

2.

Succinctly, the facts of the case are that FIR in the present case was got registered on the statement of complainant, namely, Harish Kumar. It was alleged that the complainant was working as Branch

CRM-M No.6270 of 2026 (O&M) -2Manager at Bharat Finance Inclusion Ltd. (Indo Sind Bank), Malerkotla. It was alleged that their company provides financial assistance to poor people in villages and towns for employment purposes. It was alleged that the petitioner, namely, Lovepreet Singh @ Pamma was working in their branch as Field Officer and was dealing with customers. It was alleged that the petitioner collected the outstanding loan amounts from the customers and kept the same with himself. The complainant alleged that the petitioner misappropriated the amount received and did not deposit any collected amount in the branch and thus, he embezzled a total amount of Rs.9,61,225/-. Thus, the request was made to take legal action against the accused. On the basis of the same, the FIR was registered.

On registration of the FIR, the investigation commenced. Resultantly, the petitioner was arrested on 18.05.2025. On completion of the investigation, the challan was presented and on framing of charges, the trial commenced. The petitioner approached the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Malerkotla praying for the grant of regular bail. However, after hearing both the sides and finding no merit in the same, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Malerkotla dismissed the bail application filed by the petitioner vide order dated 10.07.2025. Being aggrieved, the petitioner earlier approached this Court praying for the grant of regular bail by way of filing CRM-M-44962-2025, however the same was dismissed as not pressed vide order dated 03.11.2025.

Hence being aggrieved, the petitioner is again before this Court praying for grant of regular bail by way of filing the present second petition.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently contended that the petitioner has been falsely and frivolously implicated in the present

CRM-M No.6270 of 2026 (O&M) -3case. She has submitted that the petitioner was the Field Officer, who has alleged to have collected the instalments from various villagers, who were granted the loan by the branch, and the petitioner allegedly did not deposit the same with the bank. She has submitted that the present FIR was lodged on 18.05.2022, wherein the petitioner was arrested on 18.05.2025. She has submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedents as he has never been involved in any other case and he has been implicated in the present case only on the basis of presumptions and assumptions. She has submitted that the petitioner is behind bars from last about 01 year, however, there is no material progress in the trial. She has submitted that in the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner deserves to be granted regular bail.

4.

Per contra, learned State counsel has vehemently opposed the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner. He has submitted that the petitioner has misused the position being the Field Officer. He has submitted that the petitioner has collected the instalments from various victims and did not deposit the same with the Bank. He has submitted that the total amount embezzled by the petitioner is Rs.9,61,225/-. He, on instructions, has submitted that out of total 30 prosecution witnesses, 04 witnesses have been examined so far. He has produced custody certificate of the petitioner today in the Court, which is taken on record. 5.

Heard.

6.

After hearing counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is deciphered that the petitioner has been alleged to have not deposited the amount of instalments collected from various persons. The total amount as alleged is Rs.9,61,225/-. Custody certificate produced would

CRM-M No.6270 of 2026 (O&M) -4show that the petitioner has suffered an incarceration of 11 months and 20 days as on 10.05.2026. It further reflects that the petitioner is not involved in any other case. Out of total 30 prosecution witnesses, 04 witnesses have been examined so far.

7.

The veracity of the allegations would be assessed only after the conclusion of the trial and on the appreciation of evidence to be led by both the parties before the trial Court. This Court would refrain itself from commenting anything on the merits of the case. The trial of the case will take sufficient long time. Keeping in view the arguments raised by both the sides and perusing the record, this Court is of the opinion that learned counsel for the petitioner succeeds in making out a case for grant of regular bail to the petitioner.

8.

Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court/Duty Magistrate. 9.

Nothing said herein shall be treated as an expression of opinion on the merits of the cases.

(RAJESH BHARDWAJ) 11.05.2026 JUDGE rittu Whether Speaking/Reasoned :

Yes/No Whether Reportable :

Yes/No