CRM-M-46930-2025 -1- 221 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-46930-2025 Date of Decision: 01.09.2025 JITENDER KUMAR … PETITIONER VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA ....RESPONDENT CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHAS MEHLA Present: Mr. Amit Siwach, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Karan Veer Singh, Sr. Deputy Advocate General, Haryana. SUBHAS MEHLA , J. (ORAL) 1. The petitioner is seeking regular bail in FIR No. 55 dated 23.02.2025, under Sections 318(4) of BNS registered at Police Station Cyber Crime East, Gurugram. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and has no role to play in the cyber crime. His account was used by the co-accused on the pretext of providing him a loan of Rs. 10,000/- as the present petitioner had taken a loan from Manish Tyagi. He also submitted that the petitioner has been in custody for three months, the investigation has already been completed qua the present petitioner and there is no other case pending against the petitioner and the trial of the case is likely to take considerable time. The SEEMA 2025.09.04 14:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-46930-2025 -2- prolonged incarceration without trial violates the petitioner’s Fundamental Right under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner prays for concession of regular bail. The petitioner undertakes to abide by all conditions imposed by this Hon’ble Court and assures that he will not tamper with evidence, influence witnesses, or abscond during trial. 3. Learned State counsel has filed the custody certificate, which is taken on record. 4. Learned State counsel, appearing on advance notice, vehemently opposes the prayer for grant of regular bail to the petitioner and submits that in case the petitioner is granted the concession of regular bail, he will misuse the same. He submits that the petitioner knowingly gave his account number in lieu of loan of Rs.10,000/- and by receiving the said money he actively participated in the crime. However, he does not dispute the fact that there is no other case pending against the petitioner. 5. Heard. 6. In view of the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner and the fact that the petitioner is in custody for more than three months; the investigation is already complete and he is not involved in any other case; the trial would take sufficient time to conclude, this Court deems it a fit case to grant the concession of regular bail to the petitioner. 7. Therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing requisite bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate/Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned. 8. However, it is made clear that in case the petitioner is found to SEEMA 2025.09.04 14:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-46930-2025 -3- be indulged in any such activity, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application for cancellation of his bail. (SUBHAS MEHLA) 01.09.2025 JUDGE Sima Sima Sima Sima Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No SEEMA 2025.09.04 14:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document