The Punjab and Haryana High Court has refused anticipatory bail to three accused persons in a case involving alleged fake government job promises, forged appointment letters, and collection of money from unemployed youths on the assurance of recruitment in the Air Force and Army.
The bench observed that allegations involving forged government documents and false assurances of public employment have “serious societal ramifications” and cannot be treated as an ordinary private dispute.
Background of the Case
The case arose from FIR No. 0022 dated January 24, 2024, registered at Police Station Sadar Narnaul, District Mahendergarh, under Sections 406, 420, 465, 467, 468 and 471 of the IPC.
According to the prosecution, the complainant alleged that in July 2022 he was approached by the accused - Sonu, Vikram @ Vikram Singh, and Ankush Yadav @ Ankit - who allegedly claimed to have influence in government departments and promised him a job in the Air Force, Army, or Military Engineering Service.
The complainant stated that he initially transferred ₹7.5 lakh electronically at the instance of accused Sonu. Later, he allegedly received appointment letters and was asked to report to Chandigarh for training formalities. He claimed he stayed there for nearly three months believing the recruitment process to be genuine.
The prosecution further alleged that more money was demanded over time and the total amount allegedly taken from the complainant reached around ₹28 lakh. Investigators also claimed that funds were routed through accounts connected to the accused persons.
The petitioners argued that they had been falsely implicated and were themselves victims of the main accused persons who allegedly duped several individuals on the pretext of arranging government jobs. They also submitted that they had joined the investigation and cooperated with the police.
Their counsel further informed the Court that the matter had been amicably settled with the complainant and relied upon compromise deeds and affidavits filed along with the petition.
The Haryana government opposed the plea and argued that this was the second anticipatory bail petition after an earlier one had already been dismissed on merits on April 6, 2026.
The State submitted that the allegations were serious in nature and involved a planned conspiracy where unemployed youths were allegedly induced to part with large amounts of money on the promise of government jobs using forged appointment letters.
Justice Sumeet Goel referred to an earlier judgment in Bhisham Singh vs. State of Haryana and reiterated that a second anticipatory bail petition is maintainable only when there is a substantial change in circumstances.
The Court observed that the allegations against the petitioners were “serious and grave in nature.” The bench noted that forged appointment letters were allegedly used to gain the complainant’s confidence and extract money on the false assurance of government employment.
“The use of forged appointment letters and false assurances of Government employment to exploit unemployed youth constitutes a grave offence having serious societal ramifications,” the Court observed.
The Court also held that merely because the parties had entered into a compromise or some amount had allegedly been repaid, the seriousness of the allegations did not get diluted.
Holding that no fresh ground or substantial change in circumstances had been shown for entertaining the second anticipatory bail petition, the High Court dismissed the plea.
Case Details
Case Title: Sonu and Others v. State of Haryana and Others
Case Number: CRM-M-26377-2026
Judge: Justice Sumeet Goel
Decision Date: May 11, 2026
