107 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M No.55207 of 2025 Date of Decision:-18.08.2026 Murasleem …..Petitioner. Versus State of Haryana .....Respondent. CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAM AGGARWAL ***** Present:- Mr. Ram Singh Chaudhary, Advocate and Mr. Pulkit Mago, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Amit Sahni, Addl. A.G, Haryana (through video-conference) and Ms. Jasmine Gill, AAG, Haryana. Mr. Shubham Jain, Advocate for the complainant. VIKRAM AGGARWAL, J. (ORAL) This is the second petition preferred under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, ‘the BNSS’) for the grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.57 dated 01.09.2024 registered under Sections 319(2), 318(4), 61(2), 308(2), 308(6) and 204 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short, ‘the BNS’), at Police Station Cyber Crime, Hisar, District Hisar, the first bail application having been withdrawn on 15.07.2025 (Annexure P-4). 2. Status report by way of affidavit of Sh. Mayank Mudgil, IPS, YAG DUTT 2026.08.19 18:07 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. CRM-M No.55207 of 2025 -2- Assistant Superintendent of Police, Hisar, District Hisar, along with Annexure R-1, filed in the Registry and the custody certificate dated 17.08.2026, filed in Court today, are taken on record. The Registry is directed to tag the same at an appropriate place on the case file. 3. The instant case is a shocking case of a cyber fraud and in a way, digital arrest. On 09.08.2024, the complainant Satbhushan Jain received an obscene video call displaying nudity from a girl allegedly named Kavita Aggarwal. The said video call was recorded by the complainant on the screen. Thereafter, he started getting calls from different persons. The callers claimed to be police officers. The complainant was informed that the girl, who had made the video call, had committed suicide and that her family was demanding arrest of the petitioner and Rs.1 crore. Repeated calls were received as a result of which, from 14.08.2024 to 31.08.2024, the complainant transferred Rs.1.20 crores to various bank accounts. Accordingly, the FIR was registered and investigation commenced. 4. As per the status report submitted by way of affidavit of the Assistant Superintendent of Police, Hisar, the bank account details of the suspected accounts were obtained. Co-accused Haider Ali and the present petitioner (Murasleem) were apprehended on 02.09.2024. Mobile phones, SIM cards etc. were taken into possession. As per the disclosure statement of the petitioner, he had obtained a sum of Rs.40-50 lakhs from the complainant. Rs.6 lakhs were recovered from the petitioner. One Shahid Khan was also arrested. YAG DUTT 2026.08.19 18:07 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. CRM-M No.55207 of 2025 -3- 5. As per the status report, on checking of the mobile phone of the petitioner, it was found that WhatsApp was operational and in the profile picture, there was a picture of a senior police official and IG Sanjay Arora, IPS Officer, was written. 6. On completion of investigation, final report against the petitioner, co-accused Haider Ali, Aadil, Sahid and one Jaibhuwana was filed on 29.10.2024 and charges were framed on 20.12.2024. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner has strenuously urged that the petitioner has been falsely implicated. He submits that in any case, the petitioner is in custody since 02.09.2024; 1 year 11 months and 9 days have gone by; the trial will still take a sufficiently long time to conclude as out of 25 prosecution witnesses, only 4 have been examined. Learned counsel submits that the maximum sentence would be 3 years and out of the same, the petitioner is already in custody for the last almost 2 years. He submits that no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner in custody any longer. 8. Per contra, learned State counsel has, with equal vehemence, opposed the bail application stating that the allegations are extremely serious and such instances are on the rise. It has been submitted that in case the petitioner is granted bail, there is every likelihood of his absconding. 9. I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties. 10. The allegations are extremely serious. Instances of the kind are on the rise. Cyber criminals are taking undue advantage of technology. YAG DUTT 2026.08.19 18:07 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. CRM-M No.55207 of 2025 -4- Authorities are at a loss and are not normally in a position to track down the criminals. Innocent persons are being duped of crores of rupees. No doubt, the petitioner is in custody for 1 year 11 months and 9 days. However, that in itself would not be a ground to release the petitioner on bail. The argument that maximum sentence is of 3 years does not come to the aid of the petitioner at this stage. The matter can also be referred by the Magistrate in appropriate cases to the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, in terms of the provisions of Section 325 Cr.P.C. (Section 364 of the BNSS) and in that case, the sentence can go upto 7 years. 11. The Apex Court has also taken a very serious view in cases of digital arrest and cyber fraud. 12. Keeping in view the aforementioned facts and circumstances, the gravity of the allegations and the nature of the offence committed, this Court does not find any reason to grant regular bail to the petitioner. 13. That being so, the present petition is found to be devoid of merit and is accordingly dismissed. 14. However, the trial Court is directed to expedite the trial of the case. 15. Nothing stated herein above shall be construed to be an opinion on the merits of the case. (VIKRAM AGGARWAL) August 18, 2026 JUDGE Yag Dutt Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No YAG DUTT 2026.08.19 18:07 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.