CRM-M-36605 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANAAT 119 PARAMJIT STATE OF CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Present : SURYA P the petitioner under Section 482 of ‘the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023’. It has been filed with regard to a case arising out of FIR No. 09.01.2026 318(4), 319(2), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 61(2) of 2023, hereinafter being referred to as ‘BNS’ U.T. Chandigarh. 2. ‘Krishan Chand’, hereinafter being referred to as 36605-2026(O&M) 8587 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANAAT CHANDIGARH CRM DATE OF DECISION PARAMJIT SINGH VERSUS STATE OF U.T. CHANDIGARH CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA P Mr. Sandeep Gahlawat, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Manish Bansal, P.P., U.T. Chandigarh Ms. Diksha Sharma and Mr. Arjun Garg, Advocates. SURYA PARTAP SINGH, J. (oral) This petition for pre-arrest bail is the petitioner under Section 482 of ‘the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023’. It has been filed with regard to a case arising out of FIR No. 01.2026, for the commission of offence punishable under Section 318(4), 319(2), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 61(2) of 2023, hereinafter being referred to as ‘BNS’ U.T. Chandigarh. The abovementioned FIR came into being ‘Krishan Chand’, hereinafter being referred to as 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANAAT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-36605-2026(O&M) DATE OF DECISION : 09.07.2026 .....PETITIONER VERSUS .....RESPONDENT SURYA PARTAP SINGH Advocate for the petitioner. U.T. Chandigarh with sha Sharma and Mr. Arjun Garg, Advocates. arrest bail is the second petition, filed by the petitioner under Section 482 of ‘the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023’. It has been filed with regard to a case arising out of FIR No.3 dated fence punishable under Sections 308, 318(4), 319(2), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 61(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, hereinafter being referred to as ‘BNS’, Police Station Cyber Crime, The abovementioned FIR came into being at the instance of ‘Krishan Chand’, hereinafter being referred to as ‘complainant’ only. It was .2026 .....PETITIONER .....RESPONDENT filed by the petitioner under Section 482 of ‘the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, dated 308, Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, , Police Station Cyber Crime, instance of only. It was GAURAV THAKUR 2026.07.10 19:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-36605 stated by the above pm, he received a call on his mobile phone from an unknown number the caller claimed him Station Mumbai. According to complainant, he was told by the caller that a card issued in his name had been used therefore, the complainant would be arrested and his entire property would be confiscated. 3. him not to leave his house as in such case, he would be shot complainant further stated that thereafter, he received a from another number, wherein a person wearing a police uniform threatened and intimidated him had been arrested digitally. According to complainant, the call was received by his wife and she, too, was digitally arrested. complainant sent to him through identifying him and his wife under fear of imminent arrest and prosecution, a sum of Rs.38,00,000/ No.925020059588797 in the name of 4. statement up. 36605-2026(O&M) 8587 stated by the above-named complainant that on 07.01.2026 at about 05:50 he received a call on his mobile phone from an unknown number the caller claimed himself to be a police officer posted at Colaba Police Station Mumbai. According to complainant, he was told by the caller that a card issued in his name had been used for money laundering purposes, and therefore, the complainant would be arrested and his entire property would be confiscated. It was also stated by the complainant that the caller also told him not to leave his house as in such case, he would be shot complainant further stated that thereafter, he received a from another number, wherein a person wearing a police uniform threatened and intimidated him. As per complainan had been arrested digitally. According to complainant, the call was received by his wife and she, too, was digitally arrested. complainant further stated that the arrest warrant and other documents were sent to him through WhatsApp, and thereafter, a person called them, identifying himself as the Director of CBI. As per complainant by putting him and his wife under fear of imminent arrest and prosecution, a sum of Rs.38,00,000/- was got deposited in Axis Bank account No.925020059588797 in the name of ‘Navjeevan Nirman Trust It is the case of the prosecution that in view of above statement, formal FIR of this case was lodged, and the investigation taken 2 named complainant that on 07.01.2026 at about 05:50 he received a call on his mobile phone from an unknown number, and a police officer posted at Colaba Police Station Mumbai. According to complainant, he was told by the caller that a for money laundering purposes, and therefore, the complainant would be arrested and his entire property would It was also stated by the complainant that the caller also told him not to leave his house as in such case, he would be shot. The complainant further stated that thereafter, he received a WhatsApp video call from another number, wherein a person wearing a police uniform threatened nt he was told by the caller that he had been arrested digitally. According to complainant, thereafter a similar call was received by his wife and she, too, was digitally arrested. T that the arrest warrant and other documents were , and thereafter, a person called them, himself as the Director of CBI. As per complainant by putting him and his wife under fear of imminent arrest and prosecution, a sum of was got deposited in Axis Bank account Navjeevan Nirman Trust’. is the case of the prosecution that in view of above-mentioned formal FIR of this case was lodged, and the investigation taken named complainant that on 07.01.2026 at about 05:50 and a police officer posted at Colaba Police Station Mumbai. According to complainant, he was told by the caller that a for money laundering purposes, and therefore, the complainant would be arrested and his entire property would It was also stated by the complainant that the caller also told . The pp video call from another number, wherein a person wearing a police uniform threatened that he reafter a similar The that the arrest warrant and other documents were , and thereafter, a person called them, himself as the Director of CBI. As per complainant by putting him and his wife under fear of imminent arrest and prosecution, a sum of was got deposited in Axis Bank account mentioned formal FIR of this case was lodged, and the investigation taken GAURAV THAKUR 2026.07.10 19:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-36605 5. 6. respondent with. 7. 8. with regard in the ab petitioner that when the first petition for anticipatory bail filed b dismissed, it was observed by this Court 36605-2026(O&M) 8587 Notice of motion. Mr. Manish Bansal, P.P., U.T. Chandigarh respondent-State. Hence service of notice upon the State is hereby dispensed Heard. It has been contended by learned counsel for with regard to other accused, the investigation is already complete bovementioned investigation nothing has been found against the petitioner. It has further been contended by that when the first petition for anticipatory bail filed b dismissed, it was observed by this Court that “there are very specific allegations against the petitioner, based on the disclosure statement of co instrumental in converting the currency so received from the complainant or other victims into Crypto currency. There is no denial of the fact in the present case a huge amount was received by the fraudsters by digitally arresting the victim/complainant. The above and his co-accused comes within the ambit of Cyber crime. The magnitude of the Cyber crime, involving financial extortion and impersonation as law enforcement official poses a serious threat to the public confidence in digital transaction. The sophisticated nature of the crime, the 3 Mr. Manish Bansal, P.P., U.T. Chandigarh appears on behalf of State. Hence service of notice upon the State is hereby dispensed by learned counsel for the petitioner that other accused, the investigation is already complete and t nothing has been found against the been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that when the first petition for anticipatory bail filed by the petitioner was that:- there are very specific allegations against the petitioner, on the disclosure statement of co-accused, that he was instrumental in converting the currency so received from the inant or other victims into Crypto currency. There is no denial of the fact in the present case a huge amount was received by the fraudsters by digitally arresting the victim/complainant. The above-mentioned act of the petitioner ithin the ambit of Cyber crime. The magnitude of the Cyber crime, involving financial extortion and impersonation as law enforcement official poses a serious threat to the public confidence in digital transaction. The sophisticated nature of the crime, the quantum of deception and appears on behalf of State. Hence service of notice upon the State is hereby dispensed the petitioner that that nothing has been found against the learned counsel for the petitioner y the petitioner was there are very specific allegations against the petitioner, accused, that he was instrumental in converting the currency so received from the inant or other victims into Crypto currency. There is no denial of the fact in the present case a huge amount was received by the fraudsters by digitally arresting the mentioned act of the petitioner ithin the ambit of Cyber crime. The magnitude of the Cyber crime, involving financial extortion and impersonation as law enforcement official poses a serious threat to the public confidence in digital transaction. The quantum of deception and GAURAV THAKUR 2026.07.10 19:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-36605 9. a senior citizen have already been accorded the benefit of bail, anticipatory bail 10. abovementioned arguments. Counsel that therefore, According petitioner been accorded the benefit of regular bail and not also been contended by learned State Counsel that there is no change in circumstances bail, as the petitioner has never joined the investigation. learned State Counsel, in view of above the petition for anticipatory bail 11. 12. which have been taken by the petitioner in been dealt with while dealing with the former petition for anticipatory bail Thus, no new ground for entertaining the present petition 36605-2026(O&M) 8587 the money involved therein magnifies the negative impact of such actions on the society”. According to learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner a senior citizen who has no criminal antecedents have already been accorded the benefit of bail, anticipatory bail may be accorded to the petitioner. The learned State Counsel abovementioned arguments. It has been contende Counsel that the investigation qua the petitioner is not complete , at this stage he is not entitled to the benefit of anticipatory bail g to learned State Counsel ev r is not entitled to the concessio accorded the benefit of regular bail and not also been contended by learned State Counsel that there is no change in circumstances from the date of dismissal of former , as the petitioner has never joined the investigation. learned State Counsel, in view of above the petition for anticipatory bail, is not maintainable. The record has been perused carefully. A perusal of record shows that which have been taken by the petitioner in been dealt with while dealing with the former petition for anticipatory bail , no new ground for entertaining the present petition 4 the money involved therein magnifies the negative impact of According to learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner has no criminal antecedents, and that the co-accused have already been accorded the benefit of bail, and therefore, the benefit of may be accorded to the petitioner. The learned State Counsel has controverted the It has been contended by the learned State qua the petitioner is not complete; and he is not entitled to the benefit of anticipatory bail ven on the ground of parity, on of bail, as the co-accused have accorded the benefit of regular bail and not the anticipatory bail. It has also been contended by learned State Counsel that there is no change in of dismissal of former petition for anticipatory , as the petitioner has never joined the investigation. According to learned State Counsel, in view of above the present petition, which is second is not maintainable. The record has been perused carefully. A perusal of record shows that, by and large, all the pleas, which have been taken by the petitioner in the present petition, have already been dealt with while dealing with the former petition for anticipatory bail , no new ground for entertaining the present petition is made out. the money involved therein magnifies the negative impact of According to learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner is accused benefit of has controverted the State ; and he is not entitled to the benefit of anticipatory bail. the have the anticipatory bail. It has also been contended by learned State Counsel that there is no change in anticipatory According to second all the pleas, , have already been dealt with while dealing with the former petition for anticipatory bail. GAURAV THAKUR 2026.07.10 19:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-36605 13. that there the present hereby dismissed 14. shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. 15. application 09.07.2026 Gaurav Thakur Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable 36605-2026(O&M) 8587 In view of above, once the pe is any change in the relevant ci present petition is devoid of merits an dismissed, accordingly. It is, however, clarified that the observations made hereinabove shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. Since the main petition has been dismissed, pending applications, if any, are rendered infructuous. .2026 (SURYA PA Whether speaking/reasoned :Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No 5 etitioner has failed to plead & sh ircumstances, it is hereby held that nd deserves dismissal. The same is It is, however, clarified that the observations made hereinabove shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. Since the main petition has been dismissed, pending rendered infructuous. SURYA PARTAP SINGH) JUDGE :Yes/No : Yes/No how that same is It is, however, clarified that the observations made hereinabove shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. Since the main petition has been dismissed, pending GAURAV THAKUR 2026.07.10 19:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document