CRM-M-66649- IN THE H (216) RAHUL CHOOK STATE OF HAR CORAM: HON Present: Mr. Ms. H MANISHA BATR 1. The 482 of Bharatiya N of anticipatory b registered under S short “BNS”) and Telecommunicatio 2. The a evening of 20th/21 Station Cyber Crim in Twin Tower of centers had been money from them. -2025 (O&M) 1 THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB A CHANDIGARH OOKAR Versus
HARYANA HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANIS Mr. Jasbir Singh Dadwal, Advocate fo Ms. Himani Arora, AAG, Haryana ****
BATRA, J. (ORAL)
The instant petition has been filed atiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 tory bail in case arising out of FI nder Sections 319 and 61 of Bharat ) and Sections 75, 66, 66-C and 66D nication Act, Police Station Cyber Crim The adumbrated facts as emanating f 20th/21st August, 2025, a secret infor er Crime, Panchkula that some fake ca wer of IT Park, Sector 22, Panchkula been cheating on the persons living them. Believing the secret informatio JAB AND HARYANA AT ARH
CRM-M-66649-2025 (O&M) Date of decision : 09.02.2026 ... Petitioner ...Respondent ANISHA BATRA
cate for the petitioner by the petitioner under Section , 2023 (for short “BNSS”) for grant of FIR No.100 dated 21.08.2025 haratiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for 66D of IT Act and Section 42(3) of er Crime, Panchkula. ating from the record are that on the t information was received at Police fake call centers were being operated hkula and the operators of those call living abroad and were extracting rmation to be true, 03 raiding parties M) 2026 oner
dent
ction grant 2025 (for 3) of n the e rated call cting rties AMIT SHARMA 2026.02.10 10:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-66649- were formed. Se conducted raid at girls while conver Lite Dialer apps a Mahesh Chandra apprehended and Chandra Shekhar under the garb of defrauding them w some of them use He also disclosed or hawala transact cash amounting to into custody by t investigate the cas 3. As p Shekhar Shetty disclosure stateme and Stephen had Panchkula. USA providing custome using different Ap abroad and after c them used to call and after obtainin -2025 (O&M) 2 Search warrants were got issued aid at call centre named as Certys IT S onversating with foreign nationals wit apps and duping them of their mone andra Shekhar Shetty, operator/own d and disclosed their names and p ekhar Shetty disclosed that he had rb of providing customer services to them with the help of different softwar m used to extract details by showing losed that he was receiving the defrau ansactions. Several laptops, earphones ting to Rs.8,20,000/- were recovered y by the Police. A special investiga he case. As per the further allegations, th suffered further disclosure sta tatement disclosed that he alongwith n had been running an IT Compa USA nationals were being cheated ustomer services of different companie ent Apps. A caller team engaged by t after collecting the details of the calle to call such persons by introducing th btaining their bank details such vic issued. One of the raiding parties s IT Services and found 28 boys and als with the help of Eyebeam and X- r money. They alongwith accused- tor/owner of the call centre were and particulars. Accused-Mahesh had taken those premises on rent es to foreign nationals and had been oftwares. He had formed teams and owing themselves as bank officials. defrauded money by way of bitcoin phones, mobile phones, chargers and red from the call centre and taken estigation team was constituted to ns, the accused-Mahesh Chandra re statements and in his second gwith the co-accused Rahul Dogra ompany by hiring a premises in heated by them on the pretext of mpanies namely Netflix, Amazon by ed by them used to attend calls from e callers, the bank team engaged by cing themselves as banking officers ch victims were trapped and were rties s and - - were hesh rent been s and cials. tcoin s and aken d to ndra ond ogra s in t of n by from d by icers were AMIT SHARMA 2026.02.10 10:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-66649- cheated by depriv transactions and nominated as accu grant of anticipat Additional Session 3. It is a falsely implicated disclosure stateme name of one Rahu His named was su He was neither documentary evid with the subject cr and has nothing t custodial interroga It is, thus, argued t 4. Per c against the petition has revealed that call centre used fo the pretext of pro petitioner’s name because in the dis as Rahul Dogra, h -2025 (O&M) 3 depriving of their money which w and was distributed amongst them as accused. Apprehending his arrest, ticipatory bail which has been dism essions Judge, Panchkula vide order d It is argued by learned counsel for t licated in this case. He was not n tatement of the co-accused Mahesh e Rahul Dogra though the name of th was subsequently added without there ither present at the spot at the tim y evidence has been collected by th ject crime. He was not the Director of hing to do with the same. He is rea terrogation is not required. No recove rgued that the petition deserves to be al Per contra, learned State counsel ha petitioner are quite serious in nature. that the petitioner alongwith the co sed for the purpose of duping foreign of providing technical assistance to name has cropped up during the co he disclosure statement of co-accused gra, he cannot claim to be innocent. ich was received through Hawala t themselves. The petitioner was arrest, he moved an application for n dismissed by the Court of Ld. order dated 14.11.2025. l for the petitioner that he has been not named in the FIR. Even the ahesh Chandra Shetty disclosed the of the petitioner is Rahul Chookar. t there being any material on record. the time of alleged raid nor any by the prosecution to connect him ctor of the fake call centre as alleged is ready to join investigation. His recovery is to be effected from him. o be allowed. nsel has argued that the allegations ture. Investigation conducted so far he co-accused was running the fake foreign nationals of their money, on nce to resolve their problems. The the course of investigation. Simply cused his name has been mentioned cent. For the purpose of conducting ala was n for Ld. been the the . cord. any him eged His him. tions o far fake y, on The mply oned cting AMIT SHARMA 2026.02.10 10:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-66649- proper investigatio required. It is, thu 5. This C for both the parties 6. The alongwith the co The allegations ag Crimes of this na today's digital age public persons and is required. It is w in exceptional circ pre-arrest bail wou case custodial int Agency, that shal effecting the inve anticipatory bail d criminal cases by powers for grant ordinary and exce consideration the n may entail. In circumstance is, h For the purpose -2025 (O&M) 4 stigation in the matter, custodial inte is, thus, argued that the petition does n This Court has heard the rival submis parties. The petitioner is alleged to have be e co-accused and were duping the for ons against him are serious in nature. T his nature are on the rise and have b tal age. Cyber criminals are using so ns and institutions. A stringent approa It is well settled that anticipatory bai al circumstances only as a person cou ail would certainly not disclose all the ial interrogation of the petitioner is t shall leave many glaring loopholes e investigation. The Court is also req bail does not operate as inroad in t ses by the trial Court. It is well settle grant of pre-arrest bail are to be exe d exceptional circumstances and with g n the nature of the accusation and the . In the instant case, no such e e is, however, made out from the ple rpose of conducting thorough and p ial interrogation of the petitioner is does not deserve to be allowed. ubmissions made by learned counsel ave been running a fake call centre the foreign nationals of their money. ature. The case is at its nascent stage. have become a growing menace in ing sophisticated methods to target approach for deterring the offenders ry bail to an accused can be granted on couched in comparative safety of all the facts within his knowledge. In ner is denied to the Investigating pholes and gaps, thereby adversely lso required to see that an order of d in the normal legal procedure of l settled proposition of law that the be exercised by the Court in extra- with great caution while taking into nd the sentence which the conviction uch exceptional or extra-ordinary the pleas as taken by the petitioner. and proper investigation, custodial er is unsel entre . tage. in arget s nted ty of e. In ating rsely er of re of t the - into ction inary oner. odial AMIT SHARMA 2026.02.10 10:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-66649- interrogation of t discussed facts, th deserve to be allow 7. It is, shall not be constr shall not influence 8. Since any, is rendered in 09.02.2026 Amit Sharma


-2025 (O&M) 5 n of the petitioner is must. Taking cts, this Court is of the considered opi e allowed. Accordingly the same is di It is, however, clarified that the ob construed as an expression of opinion luence the outcome of the trial. Since the main petition has been dism ered infructuous. (MA Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes 
 

aking into consideration the above red opinion that the petition does not e is dismissed. the observations made hereinabove pinion on the merits of the case and en dismissed, pending application, if (MANISHA BATRA)
JUDGE
Yes/No
bove s not bove and n, if AMIT SHARMA 2026.02.10 10:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.