CRM-M-34131 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA 228 Rahul State of Haryana Coram : Present: Rajesh Bhardwaj, J. 1. the BNSS, 2023, is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in a case FIR No.08 dated 19.04.2024, registered under Sections 120 at Police Station Cyber Police Station, Mahendergarh, District Mahendergarh. 2. lodged on the statement of Raunak Garg d/o Parmod Kumar. It was alleged that she was working as an Narnaul. On 04.04.2024, she joined a website through an advertisement link on Telegram. She was assigned a task of rating products. Thereafter, they gave her a bonus of Rs.500/ for which they charged Rs.10,000/ allowed to withdraw Rs.10,000/ entrapped and finally she found that an amount of Rs.7 lacs was extracted fro her under the pretext of withdrawal. Thereafter, they started demanding an additional amount of Rs.9,70,749/ fraud having been committed with her, she made a request to take legal action against the culprits. On 34131-2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Versus State of Haryana and another Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bhardwaj Mr. Vikas Tripathi, Advocate, Ms. Mandavi Pandey, Advocate, Mr. Surjeet Kumar Mishra, Advocate, Mr. Kunal Shahi, Advocate, for the petitioner. Ms. Diya Sodhi, Sr. DAG, Haryana. Rajesh Bhardwaj, J. Prayer in the present second petition, filed under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023, is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in a case FIR No.08 dated 19.04.2024, registered under Sections 120 at Police Station Cyber Police Station, Mahendergarh, District Mahendergarh. Succinctly facts of the case are that FIR in the present case was lodged on the statement of Raunak Garg d/o Parmod Kumar. It was alleged that she was working as an Accountant Assistant in the BDPO office, Block Narnaul. On 04.04.2024, she joined a website through an advertisement link on Telegram. She was assigned a task of rating products. Thereafter, they gave her a bonus of Rs.500/-. On the next day, she was aske for which they charged Rs.10,000/-. After completion of the task, she was allowed to withdraw Rs.10,000/- plus Rs.2,666/ entrapped and finally she found that an amount of Rs.7 lacs was extracted fro her under the pretext of withdrawal. Thereafter, they started demanding an additional amount of Rs.9,70,749/- for enabling further withdrawal. Finding fraud having been committed with her, she made a request to take legal action against the culprits. On the registration of the FIR, the investigation - 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-34131-2025 Decided on:11.09.2025 ...Petitioner ...Respondent Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bhardwaj Ms. Mandavi Pandey, Advocate, Mr. Surjeet Kumar Mishra, Advocate, Mr. Kunal Shahi, Advocate, for the petitioner. Sr. DAG, Haryana. Prayer in the present second petition, filed under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023, is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in a case FIR No.08 dated 19.04.2024, registered under Sections 120-B, 201, 420 & 406 IPC, at Police Station Cyber Police Station, Mahendergarh, District Mahendergarh. Succinctly facts of the case are that FIR in the present case was lodged on the statement of Raunak Garg d/o Parmod Kumar. It was alleged that Accountant Assistant in the BDPO office, Block Narnaul. On 04.04.2024, she joined a website through an advertisement link on Telegram. She was assigned a task of rating products. Thereafter, they gave her . On the next day, she was asked to purchase an agent pass, . After completion of the task, she was plus Rs.2,666/- and thus, she was very well entrapped and finally she found that an amount of Rs.7 lacs was extracted fro her under the pretext of withdrawal. Thereafter, they started demanding an for enabling further withdrawal. Finding fraud having been committed with her, she made a request to take legal action the registration of the FIR, the investigation ...Petitioner ...Respondent Prayer in the present second petition, filed under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023, is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in a case FIR 406 IPC, at Police Station Cyber Police Station, Mahendergarh, District Mahendergarh. Succinctly facts of the case are that FIR in the present case was lodged on the statement of Raunak Garg d/o Parmod Kumar. It was alleged that Accountant Assistant in the BDPO office, Block Narnaul. On 04.04.2024, she joined a website through an advertisement link on Telegram. She was assigned a task of rating products. Thereafter, they gave her d to purchase an agent pass, . After completion of the task, she was and thus, she was very well entrapped and finally she found that an amount of Rs.7 lacs was extracted from her under the pretext of withdrawal. Thereafter, they started demanding an for enabling further withdrawal. Finding fraud having been committed with her, she made a request to take legal action the registration of the FIR, the investigation VINOD KUMAR 2025.09.19 15:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-34131 commenced. During the investigation, complicity of the petitioner was surfaced and thus, he was arrayed as an accused. He was arrested on 26.10.2024. Initially, he approached the Court of learned Additional Se Judge, Narnaul, praying for grant of regular bail. However, learned Court after hearing both the sides, finding no merit in the petition filed by the petitioner, dismissed the same vide order dated 02.01.2025. Aggrieved against the said order, the petitioner, on an earlier occasion, approached this Court for grant of regular bail by way of filing CRM Court vide order dated 27.01.2025. the learned Additional Sessions J application, but the same has also been dismissed vide its order dated 28.05.2025. filing the present 3. while dismissing his earlier bail application bearing CRM learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the complainant has already been examined who has stated that she compromise with the accused persons and has received an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- the same date, has already been enlarged on regular bail by the learned Additional S has prayed that the present petitioner may also be enlarged on regular bail in view of he changed circumstances. 4. 5. accepted notice on behalf of the respondent report by way of an affidavit of Mr. Suresh Kumar, HPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Narnaul, District Mahendergarh on behalf of 34131-2025 commenced. During the investigation, complicity of the petitioner was surfaced and thus, he was arrayed as an accused. He was arrested on 26.10.2024. Initially, he approached the Court of learned Additional Se Judge, Narnaul, praying for grant of regular bail. However, learned Court after hearing both the sides, finding no merit in the petition filed by the petitioner, dismissed the same vide order dated 02.01.2025. Aggrieved against the said petitioner, on an earlier occasion, approached this Court for grant of regular bail by way of filing CRM-M-3360-2025, which was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 27.01.2025. However, the petitioner again approached the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Narnaul, by way of filing 4 application, but the same has also been dismissed vide its order dated 28.05.2025. Hence, the petitioner has again filing the present second petition praying for grant of regular bai Besides the arguments contained in the order dated 27.01.2025 while dismissing his earlier bail application bearing CRM learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the complainant has already been examined who has stated that she compromise with the accused persons and has received an amount of - and further co-accused Manvender Singh, who was arrested on the same date, has already been enlarged on regular bail by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Narnaul, vide order dated 20.05.2025 has prayed that the present petitioner may also be enlarged on regular bail in view of he changed circumstances. Notice of motion. On asking of the Court, Ms. Diya Sodhi, Sr. DAG, H accepted notice on behalf of the respondent report by way of an affidavit of Mr. Suresh Kumar, HPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Narnaul, District Mahendergarh on behalf of - 2 - commenced. During the investigation, complicity of the petitioner was surfaced and thus, he was arrayed as an accused. He was arrested on 26.10.2024. Initially, he approached the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Narnaul, praying for grant of regular bail. However, learned Court after hearing both the sides, finding no merit in the petition filed by the petitioner, dismissed the same vide order dated 02.01.2025. Aggrieved against the said petitioner, on an earlier occasion, approached this Court for grant of 2025, which was dismissed by this However, the petitioner again approached udge, Narnaul, by way of filing 4th bail application, but the same has also been dismissed vide its order dated again approached this Court by way of petition praying for grant of regular bail. Besides the arguments contained in the order dated 27.01.2025 while dismissing his earlier bail application bearing CRM-M-3360-2025, learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the complainant has already been examined who has stated that she has voluntarily entered into a compromise with the accused persons and has received an amount of accused Manvender Singh, who was arrested on the same date, has already been enlarged on regular bail by the learned essions Judge, Narnaul, vide order dated 20.05.2025 and, thus, he has prayed that the present petitioner may also be enlarged on regular bail in On asking of the Court, Ms. Diya Sodhi, Sr. DAG, Haryana, has accepted notice on behalf of the respondent-State. She has filed the status report by way of an affidavit of Mr. Suresh Kumar, HPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Narnaul, District Mahendergarh on behalf of commenced. During the investigation, complicity of the petitioner was surfaced and thus, he was arrayed as an accused. He was arrested on ssions Judge, Narnaul, praying for grant of regular bail. However, learned Court after hearing both the sides, finding no merit in the petition filed by the petitioner, dismissed the same vide order dated 02.01.2025. Aggrieved against the said petitioner, on an earlier occasion, approached this Court for grant of 2025, which was dismissed by this However, the petitioner again approached bail application, but the same has also been dismissed vide its order dated approached this Court by way of Besides the arguments contained in the order dated 27.01.2025 2025, learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the complainant has already has voluntarily entered into a compromise with the accused persons and has received an amount of accused Manvender Singh, who was arrested on the same date, has already been enlarged on regular bail by the learned and, thus, he has prayed that the present petitioner may also be enlarged on regular bail in aryana, has . She has filed the status report by way of an affidavit of Mr. Suresh Kumar, HPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Narnaul, District Mahendergarh on behalf of VINOD KUMAR 2025.09.19 15:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-34131 respondent-State and same is taken present second bail application is not maintainable only on the ground that co accused has already been granted regular bail by the lower Court and the complainant has also been examined and hence, prays for dismissal present petition. 6. record, it is deciphered that CRM-M-3360 while recording detailed reasons and now no changed circumstance has been brought on record by the learned counsel for the petitioner except the argument that the complainant has already been examined who has admitted the factum of compromise and co regular bail by the lower Court changed circumstance and do not entitle the petitioner to be enlarged on bail. Except these two points, no other argument has been raised by l for the petitioner. which were defrauded by the accused persons including the petitioner by enticing the innocent people and the hard earned money of the be recovered and the source thereof is also 7. ground for the grant of bail to the petitioner and hence, the present petition, being devoid of any merit, is hereby dismisse 8. on the merits of the case. September 1 vinod* 34131-2025 State and same is taken on record. present second bail application is not maintainable only on the ground that co accused has already been granted regular bail by the lower Court and the complainant has also been examined and hence, prays for dismissal present petition. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is deciphered that the earlier bail application of the petitioner bearing 3360-2025 was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 27.01.2025 e recording detailed reasons and now no changed circumstance has been brought on record by the learned counsel for the petitioner except the argument that the complainant has already been examined who has admitted the factum of compromise and co-accused Manvender Singh has already been granted regular bail by the lower Court and these changed circumstance and do not entitle the petitioner to be enlarged on bail. Except these two points, no other argument has been raised by l for the petitioner. Moreover, the entire scam runs into about Rs.3,50,00,000/ which were defrauded by the accused persons including the petitioner by enticing the innocent people and the hard earned money of the red and the source thereof is also yet In view of the overall facts and circumstances, this Court finds no ground for the grant of bail to the petitioner and hence, the present petition, being devoid of any merit, is hereby dismisse Nothing said herein shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. September 11, 2025 Whether Speaking/Reasoned: Whether Reportable: - 3 - cord. She has submitted that the present second bail application is not maintainable only on the ground that co accused has already been granted regular bail by the lower Court and the complainant has also been examined and hence, prays for dismissal of the After hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the the earlier bail application of the petitioner bearing 2025 was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 27.01.2025 e recording detailed reasons and now no changed circumstance has been brought on record by the learned counsel for the petitioner except the argument that the complainant has already been examined who has admitted the factum nvender Singh has already been granted and these facts cannot be treated as any changed circumstance and do not entitle the petitioner to be enlarged on bail. Except these two points, no other argument has been raised by learned counsel Moreover, the entire scam runs into about Rs.3,50,00,000/ which were defrauded by the accused persons including the petitioner by enticing the innocent people and the hard earned money of the victims is yet to yet to be discovered. In view of the overall facts and circumstances, this Court finds no ground for the grant of bail to the petitioner and hence, the present petition, being devoid of any merit, is hereby dismissed. Nothing said herein shall be construed as an expression of opinion (Rajesh Bhardwaj) Judge Whether Speaking/Reasoned: NO/YES NO/YES submitted that the present second bail application is not maintainable only on the ground that co- accused has already been granted regular bail by the lower Court and the of the After hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the the earlier bail application of the petitioner bearing 2025 was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 27.01.2025 e recording detailed reasons and now no changed circumstance has been brought on record by the learned counsel for the petitioner except the argument that the complainant has already been examined who has admitted the factum nvender Singh has already been granted facts cannot be treated as any changed circumstance and do not entitle the petitioner to be enlarged on bail. earned counsel Moreover, the entire scam runs into about Rs.3,50,00,000/- which were defrauded by the accused persons including the petitioner by is yet to In view of the overall facts and circumstances, this Court finds no ground for the grant of bail to the petitioner and hence, the present petition, Nothing said herein shall be construed as an expression of opinion VINOD KUMAR 2025.09.19 15:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document