CRM-M-16598- IN THE H (278) SOURABH STATE OF HAR CORAM: HON Present: Mr. Mr. N *** MANISHA BATR 1. The Section 483 of Bh for grant of regul registered under S Bharatiya Nyaya S at Police Station C 2. The a complaint submit 06.07.2025, he rec had accepted the above-said Facebo same number w -2026 (O&M) 1 THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB A CHANDIGARH Versus HARYANA HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANIS Shivam Chaudhary, Advocate for Mr. Neeraj Poswal, AAG, Haryana *** BATRA, J. (ORAL) The instant petition has been prefe of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanh regular bail in case arising out of nder Sections 308(2), 318(4), 319(2) yaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNS”) tion Cyber Crime, District Kaithal. The aforementioned FIR was registe submitted by the complainant Man he received a Facebook friend reques d the same. He had also shared his Facebook friend. Soon thereafter, he er wherein a female stripped of JAB AND HARYANA AT ARH CRM-M-16598-2026 (O&M) Date of decision : 29.04.2026 ... Petitioner ...Respondent ANISHA BATRA ate for the petitioner preferred by the petitioner under a Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) ut of FIR No.43 dated 25.07.2025 319(2), 336(3), 338, 340 and 61 of NS”) and Section 66D of the IT Act registered on the basis of a written t Manoj Kumar alleging that on request from one Pinky Sharma. He red his WhatsApp number with the er, he received a video call from the ed off her clothing was shown. 2026 oner dent nder SS”) 2025 1 of Act ritten on . He the the own. AMIT SHARMA 2026.04.30 09:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-16598- Apprehending som other online stuff callers while intro of YouTube exten demanded certain Rs.1,26,548/- by d and then he realiz payment. 3. After It was revealed t account of the pre was transferred in as an accused and admitting his inv accused were nom 4. It is a falsely implicated the co-accused, w transferred some unaware of those for further investig are no chances of -2026 (O&M) 2 ng some wrong, he immediately delet stuff from his end, but on the next e introducing themselves as CBI offici extended threats of making his vid ertain amount of money. He was by different transactions, however, realized that he had been duped of h After registration of FIR, investigatio aled that an amount of Rs.82,250/ he present petition and out of the said red in the bank account of one Sajid. d and was arrested on 05.12.2025. He is involvement in the crime. On h e nominated. Investigation now stand It is argued by learned counsel for t icated in this case. His bank account d ed, who without his knowledge, some amount of money in the same those transactions. He is in custody s nvestigation. The subject offences are ces of conclusion of trial in the nea deleted the chats with her and also next day he received calls and the I officials or officials from the office is video viral on Social media and was made to part with a sum of wever, the calls remained persistent d of his money, he stopped making stigation proceedings were initiated. ,250/- was transferred in the bank e said amount, a sum of Rs.31,550/- Sajid. The petitioner was nominated 25. He suffered disclosure statement On his disclosure, some other co- stands concluded. l for the petitioner that he has been ount details were obtained by one of edge, consent or involvement had same. The petitioner was totally stody since long. He is not required ces are triable by Magistrate. There e near future. His antecedents are also d the ffice and m of stent king ated. bank - ated ment - been ne of had tally uired here s are AMIT SHARMA 2026.04.30 09:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-16598- clean. No usefu anymore. It is thu 5. Per c report has vehem petitioner. He wa accused to deprive cyber fraudsters. absconding, if exte does not deserve to 6. This C for the parties at co 7. The p induced the compl Rs.82,250/- was transferred in his levelled against th clearly emerged d act but is part of crucial link in exe have a deep-roote eroding public co economic crimes, and, therefore, req -2026 (O&M) 3 useful purpose would be served b is thus, argued that he deserves to be r Per contra, learned State counsel w vehemently argued that there are se He was an active participant in the co eprive the complainant of his hard-ea sters. There are chances of his co if extended benefit of bail. It is, there erve to be allowed. This Court has heard the rival submis es at considerable length. The petitioner is alleged to have joi complainant to part with an amount of was withdrawn from the complai in his bank account by using it as a m inst the petitioner are duly supported rged during investigation. The offence art of an organized cyber fraud wher in execution of the crime. Cyber crim rooted impact on the society target blic confidence in digital platforms. rimes, effecting not only the victim bu re, require a strict approach at the stag rved by detaining him in custody to be released on bail. nsel while relying upon the status are serious allegations against the the conspiracy hatched with the co- earned money. He is one of the his committing similar offences or s, therefore, stressed that the petition ubmissions made by learned counsel ve joined the cyber fraudsters who ount of Rs.1,26,548/-. An amount of mplainant bank account and was as a mule account. The allegations orted by investigation. His role has offence in question is not an isolated wherein banking channels forms a er crimes are steadily increasing and targeting unsuspecting citizens and forms. Such offences are serious tim but the financial system at large e stage of grant of bail. Taking into tody tatus t the - f the s or tition unsel who nt of was tions e has lated ms a and and rious large into AMIT SHARMA 2026.04.30 09:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-16598- consideration the g implication which fleeing from justic opinion that the Accordingly, the p 8. It is, shall not be constr shall not influence 9. Since any, is rendered in 29.04.2026 Amit Sharma -2026 (O&M) 4 n the gravity of the allegations as leve which the release of the petition mig justice or tampering with evidence, t t the petitioner does not deserve to , the petitioner is dismissed. It is, however, clarified that the ob construed as an expression of opinion uence the outcome of the trial. Since the main petition has been dism ered infructuous. (MA Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes Whether reportable:- Yes/No as levelled against the petitioner, the n might have, the likelihood of his ence, this Court is of the considered rve to be extended benefit of bail. e observations made hereinabove inion on the merits of the case and dismissed, pending application, if (MANISHA BATRA) JUDGE Yes/No r, the f his ered bail. bove and n, if AMIT SHARMA 2026.04.30 09:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.