The Punjab and Haryana High Court has refused regular bail to advocate Vikas Kumar, who is facing investigation by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) in connection with an alleged conspiracy involving disputed trust property, forged documents, and alleged manipulation of judicial proceedings. Justice Manisha Batra held that, at the present stage, the allegations attributed to the petitioner were serious enough to deny the relief of bail.
Background of the Case
The matter arose from two criminal cases that were later investigated by the CBI after directions issued by the High Court. The cases stemmed from allegations that individuals created a separate trust with a name resembling that of an existing trust and allegedly used fabricated documents to assert rights over approximately 32 bighas of land situated on the Zirakpur-Patiala Road. The complainant trust also alleged that its property was unlawfully targeted and that armed persons had entered the land, assaulted security personnel, and damaged CCTV cameras and other property.
During the CBI investigation, the agency alleged that Vikas Kumar, a practising advocate, represented some of the accused in connected civil litigation and became involved in actions allegedly aimed at influencing the course of judicial proceedings.
CBI's Allegations
According to the prosecution, the investigation revealed that witnesses and official records relating to the complainant trust were allegedly summoned in several unrelated court cases. The CBI further claimed that these steps were taken to obtain financial information, secure favourable testimony, and exert pressure on the complainant trust.
The investigation also referred to statements of one witness, Prabhdeep Singh, who allegedly informed investigators that applications had been filed in his name without his knowledge. The CBI additionally relied on a recorded conversation, claiming it indicated attempts to influence cooperation with the investigation. It further alleged that applications were moved before another court in Bathinda in an attempt to obtain desired statements and records. These allegations remain part of the prosecution's case and are yet to be tested during trial.
Petitioner's Stand
Seeking regular bail, the petitioner argued that he had cooperated throughout the investigation and that no recovery was required from him. It was also submitted that he had not been named in the original FIRs and that the allegedly forged documents had been prepared before he became associated with the matter.
The defence further contended that he had merely represented one of the trusts as an advocate in civil proceedings, had no ownership interest in the disputed property, and that the allegations regarding summoning witnesses in unrelated cases were incorrect. It was also pointed out that he had been in custody since July 2025 and that only two out of 145 prosecution witnesses had been examined, making an early conclusion of the trial unlikely.
Court's Observations
After considering submissions from both sides, Justice Manisha Batra observed that the allegations against the petitioner went beyond routine legal representation and, at the prima facie stage, indicated an alleged role in manipulating judicial proceedings.
The Court observed,
"The allegations prima facie make out a case of formation of an organized criminal network by the petitioner with the co-accused."
It further noted that, being an advocate, the petitioner was presumed to be aware of the consequences of actions allegedly intended to influence judicial proceedings.
Taking into account the nature of the allegations, the role attributed to the petitioner, and the surrounding circumstances, the Court concluded that no case for grant of regular bail had been made out.
Decision
The High Court dismissed the bail petition, holding that there were no compelling grounds to extend the benefit of regular bail to the petitioner.
The Court also clarified that the observations made in the order were confined to deciding the bail application and would not influence the merits of the trial.
Case Details
Case Title: Vikas Kumar v. Central Bureau of Investigation
Case Number: CRM-M-64309-2025 (O&M)
Judge: Justice Manisha Batra
Decision Date: 27 July 2026
