CRM-M-43964-2025 - 1- 265 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-43964-2025 Date of Decision: 20.08.2025 Vijay Semil …Petitioner Vs. State of Punjab …Respondent Coram : Hon’ble Mr. Justice N.S.Shekhawat Present : Mr. Abdul Aziz, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. I.P.S Sabharwal, DAG, Punjab. *** N.S.Shekhawat J. 1. The petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 439 of Cr.P.C with a prayer to grant regular bail to him in case FIR No. 09, dated 02.05.2025, registered under Sections 318(4),61(2) of B.N.S, 111, 336(2), 340(2) added later on and 66-D of I.T.Act, Police Station Cyber Crime, Malerkotla, District Malerkotla (Annexure P-1). 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently argued that as per the allegations, certain persons had allured the complainant to invest in the share market through whats app group link and the complainant had allegedly deposited an amount of Rs.16.50 lacs. However, the petitioner had neither allured the complainant nor any amount was received by the petitioner from the complainant at any point of time. Even, the petitioner never contacted the complainant in any manner. Further, the petitioner is young boy aged about 22 years and is a bright student. By referring to his Indentity Card (Annexure P-1), HITESH 2025.08.22 17:21 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document/judgment High Court, Chandigarh CRM-M-43964-2025 - 2- learned counsel submits that the petitioner is pursuing his Anesthesia Technician (Anesthesiology) in G.R Medical College, Gwalior (M.P). Even, otherwise, the entire case is based on documentary evidence and the same has already been taken into possession by the police. Even, the account of the petitioner was misused and an amount of Rs.3,00,000/- was transferred to his account. The petitioner was arrested in the present case on 03.05.2025 and the investigation has already been completed in the present case. Further, the petitioner is not in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence and deserves to be granted the concession of regular bail by this Court. 3. On the other hand, learned State counsel has vehemently opposed the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner on the ground that serious allegations have been levelled against the present petitioner and he does not deserve the concession of bail by this Court. 4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record carefully. 5. In the present case, the petitioner is stated to be in custody for the last more than 03 months and challan has already been presented against him. The prosecution is yet to lead evidence to prove the involvement of the petitioner in the crime and no witness has been examined so far. Thus, conclusion of the trial may take quite a long time and further custody of the petitioner will not serve any meaningful purpose. 6. Without commenting on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on bail pending trial on his furnishing bail bonds and surety to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court/ HITESH 2025.08.22 17:21 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document/judgment High Court, Chandigarh CRM-M-43964-2025 - 3- Duty Magistrate/Chief Judicial Magistrate. (N.S.SHEKHAWAT) 20.08.2025 JUDGE hitesh Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No HITESH 2025.08.22 17:21 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document/judgment High Court, Chandigarh