Full News

Anticipatory Bail Granted to Café Manager Accused of Misappropriating ₹44 Lakhs

This case involves Sandeep Kumar, a café manager accused of stealing and misappropriating around ₹44 lakhs from his employer, Muhavra Enterprises Private Limited (Blue Tokai Coffee Roasters). The company alleged that Sandeep manipulated cash deposits over several months. Sandeep sought anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, fearing arrest. The High Court of Punjab and Haryana granted him anticipatory bail, provided he cooperates with the investigation and follows certain conditions.

Get the full picture - access the original judgement of the court order here

Case Name

Sandeep Kumar vs. State of UT, Chandigarh (High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh)

CRM-M-7719-2025

Date: 10th February 2025

Key Takeaways

Anticipatory bail granted: The court allowed Sandeep Kumar to avoid arrest, provided he joins the investigation and abides by specific conditions.
Serious allegations: Sandeep was accused of theft, criminal breach of trust, fraud, and cheating under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023.
Court’s reasoning: The court found that sending Sandeep to jail would serve no useful purpose since he was willing to cooperate with the investigation.
Legal principles: The order was passed under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023, with conditions as per Section 482(2) and reference to Section 480(3) of BNSS.
Implications: The case highlights the court’s approach to anticipatory bail in financial crime cases, especially when the accused is willing to cooperate.

Issue

Should Sandeep Kumar be granted anticipatory bail in a case involving alleged misappropriation of company funds, given the seriousness of the charges and his willingness to cooperate with the investigation?

Facts

Parties:
Petitioner: Sandeep Kumar, former café manager at Blue Tokai Coffee Roasters (Muhavra Enterprises Pvt. Ltd.).
Respondent: State of UT, Chandigarh.
Timeline & Events:
Sandeep was responsible for handling daily cash at the café.
From January 2024 to August 2024, he allegedly manipulated cash deposits, withholding large sums for personal use.
The company discovered a shortfall of about ₹44 lakhs after an audit in August 2024.
Sandeep allegedly confessed to the theft in messages and a video, then went missing.
The company filed a criminal complaint, leading to FIR No. 7 dated 24.01.2025 under Sections 316(4) and 318 of BNS, 2023.
Sandeep applied for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023.

Arguments

Petitioner (Sandeep Kumar)

Claimed he was falsely implicated and not responsible for cash handling or daily transactions.
Denied being a signatory to any cash receipts.
Asserted that the company never pointed out any discrepancies during his tenure.
Expressed willingness to join and cooperate with the investigation.

Respondent (State of UT, Chandigarh)

Opposed the bail, arguing that Sandeep misappropriated company funds for personal benefit.
Stated that recovery of the misappropriated amount was still pending.

Key Legal Precedents & Statutory References

Section 482 of BNSS, 2023:
The court’s inherent powers to grant anticipatory bail.
Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023:
Lists conditions for anticipatory bail, such as making oneself available for interrogation, not threatening witnesses, not leaving India without permission, etc.
Section 480(3) of BNSS, 2023:
Additional conditions that may be imposed if bail is granted.
Sections 316(4) and 318 of BNS, 2023:
The specific criminal charges under which the FIR was registered (relating to criminal breach of trust and cheating).

Note: The judgment does not cite any previous case law by name; it relies on statutory provisions from BNSS and BNS, 2023.

Judgement

Decision:
The High Court granted anticipatory bail to Sandeep Kumar.
Reasoning:
The court found that no useful purpose would be served by sending Sandeep to jail since he was willing to cooperate with the investigation.
Conditions:
Sandeep must join the investigation within one week.
He must furnish personal/surety bonds as required.
He must comply with conditions under Section 482(2) of BNSS, including:
Making himself available for police interrogation.
Not threatening or influencing witnesses.
Not leaving India without court permission.
Any other conditions as per Section 480(3) of BNSS.
If Sandeep fails to join the investigation within a week, the bail order will be automatically cancelled.

FAQs

Q1: What is anticipatory bail?

A: It’s a legal provision allowing a person to seek bail in anticipation of arrest, especially when they fear being falsely implicated.

Q2: What were the main charges against Sandeep Kumar?

A: He was accused of theft, criminal breach of trust, fraud, and cheating under Sections 316(4) and 318 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

Q3: Why did the court grant bail despite the serious allegations?

A: The court noted that Sandeep was willing to cooperate with the investigation and that his arrest would not serve any useful purpose at this stage.

Q4: What conditions did the court impose for bail?

A: Sandeep must join the investigation, not threaten witnesses, not leave India without permission, and comply with any other conditions set by the court.

Q5: What happens if Sandeep doesn’t comply with the bail conditions?

A: The anticipatory bail order will be automatically cancelled if he fails to join the investigation within one week.

Q6: Does this judgment mean Sandeep is acquitted?

A: No, this is only about bail. The criminal case and investigation will continue.

Similar Ripples

Questions

There is no question

Anticipatory Bail Granted to Café Manager Accused of Misappropriating ₹44 Lakhs

Write your Comment

Generic

Reportdata/CA-HC-Punjab-CRM-M-7719-2025.pdf

Would you like to edit this news ? Edit

Select Format

You get opportunity to take 30 day Challenge program.

Optional

Advanced

You get opportunity to take 30 day Challenge program.

Optional

Add tags

You get opportunity to take 30 day Challenge program.

Optional

PUBLISH IT

Don't sell
PUBLISH IT
Publish privately
SAVE AS DRAFT

Dont't publish now

<a href="https://thakurani.sgp1.digitaloceanspaces.com/media/data/CA-HC-Punjab-CRM-M-7719-2025.pdf" target="_blank" style="color: rgb(0, 102, 204);">Get the full picture - access the original judgement of the court order here</a><h3>Case Name</h3>Sandeep Kumar vs. State of UT, Chandigarh (High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh)CRM-M-7719-2025 Date: 10th February 2025<h3>Key Takeaways</h3><ul><li>Anticipatory bail granted:&nbsp;The court allowed Sandeep Kumar to avoid arrest, provided he joins the investigation and abides by specific conditions.</li><li>Serious allegations:&nbsp;Sandeep was accused of theft, criminal breach of trust, fraud, and cheating under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023.</li><li>Court’s reasoning:&nbsp;The court found that sending Sandeep to jail would serve no useful purpose since he was willing to cooperate with the investigation.</li><li>Legal principles:&nbsp;The order was passed under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023, with conditions as per Section 482(2) and reference to Section 480(3) of BNSS.</li><li>Implications:&nbsp;The case highlights the court’s approach to anticipatory bail in financial crime cases, especially when the accused is willing to cooperate.</li></ul><h3>Issue</h3>Should Sandeep Kumar be granted anticipatory bail in a case involving alleged misappropriation of company funds, given the seriousness of the charges and his willingness to cooperate with the investigation?<h3>Facts</h3><ul><li>Parties:</li><li class="ql-indent-1">Petitioner:&nbsp;Sandeep Kumar, former café manager at Blue Tokai Coffee Roasters (Muhavra Enterprises Pvt. Ltd.).</li><li class="ql-indent-1">Respondent:&nbsp;State of UT, Chandigarh.</li><li>Timeline &amp; Events:</li><li class="ql-indent-1">Sandeep was responsible for handling daily cash at the café.</li><li class="ql-indent-1">From January 2024 to August 2024, he allegedly manipulated cash deposits, withholding large sums for personal use.</li><li class="ql-indent-1">The company discovered a shortfall of about ₹44 lakhs after an audit in August 2024.</li><li class="ql-indent-1">Sandeep allegedly confessed to the theft in messages and a video, then went missing.</li><li class="ql-indent-1">The company filed a criminal complaint, leading to FIR No. 7 dated 24.01.2025 under Sections 316(4) and 318 of BNS, 2023.</li><li class="ql-indent-1">Sandeep applied for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023.</li></ul><h3>Arguments</h3>Petitioner (Sandeep Kumar)<ul><li>Claimed he was falsely implicated and not responsible for cash handling or daily transactions.</li><li>Denied being a signatory to any cash receipts.</li><li>Asserted that the company never pointed out any discrepancies during his tenure.</li><li>Expressed willingness to join and cooperate with the investigation.</li></ul> Respondent (State of UT, Chandigarh)<ul><li>Opposed the bail, arguing that Sandeep misappropriated company funds for personal benefit.</li><li>Stated that recovery of the misappropriated amount was still pending.</li></ul><h3>Key Legal Precedents &amp; Statutory References</h3><ul><li>Section 482 of BNSS, 2023:</li><li>The court’s inherent powers to grant anticipatory bail.</li><li>Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023:</li><li>Lists conditions for anticipatory bail, such as making oneself available for interrogation, not threatening witnesses, not leaving India without permission, etc.</li><li>Section 480(3) of BNSS, 2023:</li><li>Additional conditions that may be imposed if bail is granted.</li><li>Sections 316(4) and 318 of BNS, 2023:</li><li>The specific criminal charges under which the FIR was registered (relating to criminal breach of trust and cheating).</li></ul>Note:&nbsp;The judgment does not cite any previous case law by name; it relies on statutory provisions from BNSS and BNS, 2023.<h3>Judgement</h3><ul><li>Decision:</li><li>The High Court granted anticipatory bail to Sandeep Kumar.</li><li>Reasoning:</li><li>The court found that no useful purpose would be served by sending Sandeep to jail since he was willing to cooperate with the investigation.</li><li>Conditions:</li><li class="ql-indent-1">Sandeep must join the investigation within one week.</li><li class="ql-indent-1">He must furnish personal/surety bonds as required.</li><li>He must comply with conditions under Section 482(2) of BNSS, including:</li><li class="ql-indent-2">Making himself available for police interrogation.</li><li class="ql-indent-2">Not threatening or influencing witnesses.</li><li class="ql-indent-2">Not leaving India without court permission.</li><li class="ql-indent-1">Any other conditions as per Section 480(3) of BNSS.</li><li class="ql-indent-1">If Sandeep fails to join the investigation within a week, the bail order will be automatically cancelled.</li></ul><h3>FAQs</h3>Q1: What is anticipatory bail?A: It’s a legal provision allowing a person to seek bail in anticipation of arrest, especially when they fear being falsely implicated. Q2: What were the main charges against Sandeep Kumar?A: He was accused of theft, criminal breach of trust, fraud, and cheating under Sections 316(4) and 318 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. Q3: Why did the court grant bail despite the serious allegations?A: The court noted that Sandeep was willing to cooperate with the investigation and that his arrest would not serve any useful purpose at this stage. Q4: What conditions did the court impose for bail?A: Sandeep must join the investigation, not threaten witnesses, not leave India without permission, and comply with any other conditions set by the court. Q5: What happens if Sandeep doesn’t comply with the bail conditions?A: The anticipatory bail order will be automatically cancelled if he fails to join the investigation within one week. Q6: Does this judgment mean Sandeep is acquitted?A: No, this is only about bail. The criminal case and investigation will continue.

<a href="https://thakurani.sgp1.digitaloceanspaces.com/media/data/CA-HC-Punjab-CRM-M-7719-2025.pdf" target="_blank" style="color: rgb(0, 102, 204);">Get the full picture - access the original judgement of the court order here</a><h3>Case Name</h3>Sandeep Kumar vs. State of UT, Chandigarh (High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh)CRM-M-7719-2025 Date: 10th February 2025<h3>Key Takeaways</h3><ul><li>Anticipatory bail granted: The court allowed Sandeep Kumar to avoid arrest, provided he joins the investigation and abides by specific conditions.</li><li>Serious allegations: Sandeep was accused of theft, criminal breach of trust, fraud, and cheating under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023.</li><li>Court’s reasoning: The court found that sending Sandeep to jail would serve no useful purpose since he was willing to cooperate with the investigation.</li><li>Legal principles: The order was passed under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023, with conditions as per Section 482(2) and reference to Section 480(3) of BNSS.</li><li>Implications: The case highlights the court’s approach to anticipatory bail in financial crime cases, especially when the accused is willing to cooperate.</li></ul><h3>Issue</h3>Should Sandeep Kumar be granted anticipatory bail in a case involving alleged misappropriation of company funds, given the seriousness of the charges and his willingness to cooperate with the investigation?<h3>Facts</h3><ul><li>Parties:</li><li class="ql-indent-1">Petitioner: Sandeep Kumar, former café manager at Blue Tokai Coffee Roasters (Muhavra Enterprises Pvt. Ltd.).</li><li class="ql-indent-1">Respondent: State of UT, Chandigarh.</li><li>Timeline & Events:</li><li class="ql-indent-1">Sandeep was responsible for handling daily cash at the café.</li><li class="ql-indent-1">From January 2024 to August 2024, he allegedly manipulated cash deposits, withholding large sums for personal use.</li><li class="ql-indent-1">The company discovered a shortfall of about ₹44 lakhs after an audit in August 2024.</li><li class="ql-indent-1">Sandeep allegedly confessed to the theft in messages and a video, then went missing.</li><li class="ql-indent-1">The company filed a criminal complaint, leading to FIR No. 7 dated 24.01.2025 under Sections 316(4) and 318 of BNS, 2023.</li><li class="ql-indent-1">Sandeep applied for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023.</li></ul><h3>Arguments</h3>Petitioner (Sandeep Kumar)<ul><li>Claimed he was falsely implicated and not responsible for cash handling or daily transactions.</li><li>Denied being a signatory to any cash receipts.</li><li>Asserted that the company never pointed out any discrepancies during his tenure.</li><li>Expressed willingness to join and cooperate with the investigation.</li></ul> Respondent (State of UT, Chandigarh)<ul><li>Opposed the bail, arguing that Sandeep misappropriated company funds for personal benefit.</li><li>Stated that recovery of the misappropriated amount was still pending.</li></ul><h3>Key Legal Precedents & Statutory References</h3><ul><li>Section 482 of BNSS, 2023:</li><li>The court’s inherent powers to grant anticipatory bail.</li><li>Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023:</li><li>Lists conditions for anticipatory bail, such as making oneself available for interrogation, not threatening witnesses, not leaving India without permission, etc.</li><li>Section 480(3) of BNSS, 2023:</li><li>Additional conditions that may be imposed if bail is granted.</li><li>Sections 316(4) and 318 of BNS, 2023:</li><li>The specific criminal charges under which the FIR was registered (relating to criminal breach of trust and cheating).</li></ul>Note: The judgment does not cite any previous case law by name; it relies on statutory provisions from BNSS and BNS, 2023.<h3>Judgement</h3><ul><li>Decision:</li><li>The High Court granted anticipatory bail to Sandeep Kumar.</li><li>Reasoning:</li><li>The court found that no useful purpose would be served by sending Sandeep to jail since he was willing to cooperate with the investigation.</li><li>Conditions:</li><li class="ql-indent-1">Sandeep must join the investigation within one week.</li><li class="ql-indent-1">He must furnish personal/surety bonds as required.</li><li>He must comply with conditions under Section 482(2) of BNSS, including:</li><li class="ql-indent-2">Making himself available for police interrogation.</li><li class="ql-indent-2">Not threatening or influencing witnesses.</li><li class="ql-indent-2">Not leaving India without court permission.</li><li class="ql-indent-1">Any other conditions as per Section 480(3) of BNSS.</li><li class="ql-indent-1">If Sandeep fails to join the investigation within a week, the bail order will be automatically cancelled.</li></ul><h3>FAQs</h3>Q1: What is anticipatory bail?A: It’s a legal provision allowing a person to seek bail in anticipation of arrest, especially when they fear being falsely implicated. Q2: What were the main charges against Sandeep Kumar?A: He was accused of theft, criminal breach of trust, fraud, and cheating under Sections 316(4) and 318 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. Q3: Why did the court grant bail despite the serious allegations?A: The court noted that Sandeep was willing to cooperate with the investigation and that his arrest would not serve any useful purpose at this stage. Q4: What conditions did the court impose for bail?A: Sandeep must join the investigation, not threaten witnesses, not leave India without permission, and comply with any other conditions set by the court. Q5: What happens if Sandeep doesn’t comply with the bail conditions?A: The anticipatory bail order will be automatically cancelled if he fails to join the investigation within one week. Q6: Does this judgment mean Sandeep is acquitted?A: No, this is only about bail. The criminal case and investigation will continue.

Hi Thakurani,
I want to withdraw in my Thakurani wallet
Thanks,

Select the reason for validity check

I feel great..the news is still good.please give the reason too..thanks..

Why do you think the News as invalid?” Please mention the reason.

I appreciate your effort. May I request you to select one of the reasons from below.
I am marking this post and your reason to Thakurani Moderators. They will take appropriate action.
Thanks,

Write your reason

My Dear ,

Harassing

Spam

Ingenuine

Rotten

Alien

Plagiarism

Unformatted

Full News

Anticipatory Bail Granted to Café Manager Accused of Misappropriating ₹44 Lakhs