CRM-M-68490- IN THE H (142) LOKENDRA STATE OF HAR CORAM: HON Present: Mr. Ms. H Ms. J MANISHA BATR 1. The Section 483 of Bh for grant of regul registered under S IPC (Section 467, Station Cyber Cri 26737-2025 had b -2025 (O&M) 1 THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB A CHANDIGARH
Versus
HARYANA AND ANOTHER HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANIS S.S. Khurana, Advocate for the p Ms. Himani Arora, DAG, Haryana Ms. Jitender Kaur, Advocate for the c ****
BATRA, J. (ORAL)
The instant one is the second petition of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanh regular bail in case arising out of F nder Section 66D of Information Tech n 467, 468, 471, 201, 204, 120B of er Crime, District Rewari. His previ had been dismissed by this Court on 0 JAB AND HARYANA AT ARH CRM-M-68490-2025 (O&M) Date of decision : 05.03.2026 ... Petitioner ...Respondents ANISHA BATRA
r the petitioner r the complainant petition filed by the petitioner under a Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) t of FIR No.0035 dated 13.08.2024 Technology Act and Section 420 of B of IPC added later on) at Police previous petition bearing CRM-M- rt on 04.09.2025. M) 2026 oner
s
nder ) 2024 20 of olice - AMIT SHARMA 2026.03.06 12:26 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-68490- 2. The a written complaint duped of an amou premise of release them on their matu 3. After It was revealed th number used for petitioner. He w lakhs, out of the d stands completed. 4. The p by this Court by m The p defra sendi for ch petiti where he ha the re grave -2025 (O&M) 2 The aforementioned FIR had been plaint submitted by the complainant amount of Rs.58,16,826/- on being s release of amount of 04 insurance poli ir maturity and on the pretext of issuin After registration of FIR, investigatio aled that Consumer Application Form d for making calls to the complain He was arrested on 09.01.2025. Re f the duped amount was got effected leted. The previous petition as filed by the rt by making the following observation he petitioner in connivance with the efrauded and cheated the compl ending emails. The last IP address or cheating the complainant was fo etitioner. The petitioner was occup here this WiFi connection was take e had demitted those premises long he record to show so. The allegati rave in nature. Crimes of this nat been registered on the basis of a inant Rajinder Singh who had been eing subjected to cyber fraud on the ce policies which had been taken by issuing new policies in his favour. stigation proceedings were initiated. Form (CAF) of one of the mobile mplainant pertained to the present 5. Recovery of an amount of Rs.6 fected from him. Investigation now by the petitioner had been dismissed vations :- the co-accused, is alleged to have mplainant by making calls and ress of WhatsApp which was used as found to be in the name of the ccupying the office at the address taken. Though he took a plea that long back, but there is nothing on egations against the petitioner are s nature are on the rise and have of a been n the n by ated. obile esent Rs.6 now issed ave nd sed the ess hat on are ave AMIT SHARMA 2026.03.06 12:26 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-68490- becom crimi and requi call f petiti 5. It is dismissal of his p However, there ha prosecution witne considerable time with him and he h useful purpose is g day spent by him i of bail. It is thus, 6. Per report has argued nature. His previ There is no drast material on reco compromise with committed a crime -2025 (O&M) 3 ecoming a growing menace in riminals are using sophisticated me nd institutions. A stringed app equired. The gamut of above disc all for grant of benefit of bail to th etition does not deserve to be allowe It is argued by learned counsel for f his previous petition, a period of al ere has not been much progress in t witnesses have been examined so e time to conclude. The complainant h d he has no objection if the petition is se is going to be served by detaining h y him in custody has furnished him a n thus, argued that the petition deserves Per contra, learned State counsel w rgued that the allegations against the previous petition had been dismissed drastic or substantive change in the record to show that the compla with the petitioner. Even if it i a crime against the society also as the in today’s digital age. Cyber d methods to target public persons approach to deter offenders is discussed circumstances does not to the petitioner. Accordingly, the lowed and is dismissed. sel for the petitioner that after the of almost six months has elapsed. ss in the trial as only 02 out of 17 ned so far. The trial will take inant has entered into a compromise ition is allowed. Even otherwise, no ining him in custody anymore. Each im a new ground to seek concession serves to be allowed. nsel while relying upon the status st the petitioner are quite serious in missed by passing a detailed order. in the circumstances. There is no omplainant has entered into any if it is so, still the petitioner has as the allegations show that he was ber ons is not the r the psed. f 17 take mise e, no Each ssion tatus us in rder. is no any has was AMIT SHARMA 2026.03.06 12:26 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-68490- an active participa complainant. It is liable to be dismis 7. This C for the parties at co 8. Undo however, for such substantial change ostensible change the observations m Versus State of H further held that in petition, cogent a granting such plea petitioner is prolo been booked for a not only prepared insurance policies purpose of makin fraudulent and fa offender as one m because he has spe -2025 (O&M) 4 rticipant in the commission of offence t. It is, therefore, argued that the petit dismissed. This Court has heard the rival submis es at considerable length. Undoubtedly, a second/successive pe r such a period petition to succeed, th change in the circumstances and show hange would not suffice. Reference i tions made by this Court in CRA-S-23 of Haryana and another, wherein that in case a Court chooses to grant gent and lucid reasons are pertinently h plea. In the instant case, the only olonged period of incarceration. d for and is facing trial for commissio pared and sent fake receipts to the com olicies were issued in his favour but making calls by impersonating hims and fabricated documents to the com one more case of similar nature is p has spent more time in custody, canno ffence of cyber crime as against the e petition is not maintainable and is ubmissions made by learned counsel sive petition is maintainable in law, eed, the petitioner must show some d showing of a mere superficial or rence in this regard can be drawn to 2322-2022 titled as Rafiq Khan erein it was observed so and it was grant second/successive regular bail tinently required to be recorded for only ground which is taken by the tion. However, the petitioner has mission of serious offences. He had the complainant to convince him that r but also used his WiFi ID for the g himself, for sending e-mails and he complainant. He is a habitual re is pending against him. Merely cannot be considered to be a reason t the nd is unsel law, some al or n to an was r bail d for y the r has had that r the and itual erely ason AMIT SHARMA 2026.03.06 12:26 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-68490- for extending ben discussed facts, t substantive or dra petitioner should made for allowing 9. It is, be construed as an and shall not influ 10. Since any, is rendered in 05.03.2026 Amit Sharma -2025 (O&M) 5 ng benefit of bail to him. Taking acts, this Court is of the consider r drastic change in the circumstanc hould be extended benefit of bail an owing the petition. Accordingly, the s It is, however, clarified that the obse d as an expression of opinion of this C t influence the outcome of the trial in a Since the main petition has been dis ered infructuous. (MA Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes
  
aking into consideration the above nsidered opinion that there is no mstances on the basis of which the ail and hence no ground has been , the same is dismissed. e observations made above shall not this Court on the merits of the case ial in any manner.
dismissed pending application, if (MANISHA BATRA)
Yes/No
bove s no the been l not case n, if AMIT SHARMA 2026.03.06 12:26 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.