IN THE 219 Mukesh Kumar Gurjar U.T. Chandigarh CORAM : HON'BLE Present :- Mr. Mr. ***** VINOD S. BHARDWAJ The Bharatiya Nagarik petitioner in case Sections 319(2), Sanhita, 2023 at 2. Briefly complainant Ashok Company in October, him telephonically IBKR and assured Mehta and asked Manager and used Rajiv Mehta, who complainant clicked number. Rajiv Mehta by an option and in the account sent bank accounts were to chat with Ms. THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-64205 Date of decision: Gurjar VERSUS Chandigarh HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD Mr. Vivek Kathuria, Advocate for the Mr. Manish Bansal, PP for U.T. Chandigarh. ***** BHARDWAJ, J. (Oral) The instant first petition has been filed Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for case bearing FIR No.33 dated 17.04.2025 319(2), 318(4), 336(3), 338, 340(2) & 61(2) at Police Station Cyber Crime, Chandigarh Briefly stated, the facts of the Ashok Kumar S/o Nanak Chand started October, 2024. On 18.12.2024, Ms. telephonically and asked him to do online assured more profits. She also gave asked the complainant to contact him used to look finance department. who sent a link to the former on clicked the link, IBKR App got Mehta taught the complainant how and the complainant deposited Rs. sent by Mr. Rajiv Mehta. The details were also given in the complaint. Ms. Rekha Aggarwal on WhatsApp PUNJAB & HARYANA CHANDIGARH 64205-2025(O&M) decision: 14.01.2026 ...Petitioner ...Respondent VINOD S. BHARDWAJ the petitioner. Chandigarh. filed under Section 483 of the grant of regular bail to the 17.04.2025 registered under 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Chandigarh. present case are that the started trading with Zerodha Ms. Rekha Aggarwal contacted online trading with their company the mobile number of Rajiv him. Rajiv Mehta was the client department. The complainant contacted on WhatsApp. As soon as the downloaded on his mobile how to deposit money on App 56,26,000/- on various dates details of mobile numbers and complaint. The complainant also used pp, however, when he asked to SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2026.01.15 14:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 2 219 CRM-M-64205-2025(O&M) withdraw some amount, he was removed from the WhatsApp group. The accused thus induced the complainant to pay more money, misappropriated his hard earned money to the tune of Rs. 56,26,000/- and committed fraud with him. 3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner contends that the petitioner is a resident of Nayla Road, Rampura Papar, Jaipur and he had been asked by a co-villager/friend Gokul (who was an acquaintance of one Ramji Lal Meena) to open an account and to hand over the account opening kit, passbook/cheque book along with all documents to him in lieu of certain financial benefits. He further contends that the petitioner was allured by the aforesaid assurance and accordingly got opened the bank account. A registered mobile number was also obtained by him to receive messages against the said account. The SIM card was handed over by him alongwith the account opening kit, passbook as well as the cheque book to Ramji Lal Meena. A sum of Rs. 37,00,000/- was credited to the said account but the same has been withdrawn exclusively by said Ramji Lal Meena, who is already in custody. Counsel further contends that the mobile number as well as the account was being operated by Ramji Lal Meena. He further contends that the petitioner is in custody since 07.05.2025 and 15 witnesses have been relied upon by the prosecution but no witness has been examined so far. He further contends that similarly placed co-accused Aditya Kumar Jain and Vijay Kumar Yogi have already been granted concession of regular bail by this Court vide a common order dated 27.10.2025 in CRM-M-49099- 2025 & CRM-M-49988-2025. 4. State counsel on instructions from SI Jaskarandeep Kaur contends that the petitioner had given his account in which entries to the SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2026.01.15 14:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 3 219 CRM-M-64205-2025(O&M) tune of Rs.37,00,000/- were credited. He however does not dispute that SIM card of the registered mobile number against the said account as well as the account kit was recovered from Ramji Lal Meena. Hence, the contention of the petitioner to the aforesaid effect stands corroborated. He further does not dispute stage of the evidence. It is further not disputed that the petitioner has clean antecedents and is not involved in any other criminal case. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respective parties and have gone through the documents appended along with the present petition. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances as noticed hereinabove, the actual custody of more than 08 months undergone by the petitioner, the role attributed to him, his clean antecedents, as well as the stage of the trial, I deem it appropriate to allow the present petition. 7. The instant petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing requisite bail bond/surety bond to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate, concerned. 8. It is made clear that the petitioner shall not extend any threat and shall not influence any prosecution witnesses in any manner directly or indirectly. 9. The observation made hereinabove shall not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case and the Trial Court shall decide the case on the basis of available material. 10. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. 14.01.2026 (VINOD S. BHARDWAJ) Sumit Gusain JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2026.01.15 14:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document