CRM-M-46297 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA 107 Parvej State of Haryana Coram : Present: Rajesh Bhardwaj, J. 1. BNSS, 2023 No.0110 dated 20.05.2025, registered under Sections 318(4), 319, 336(3), 338, 340 of the BNS, 2023, at Police Station Pinagwan, District Nuh. 2. registered on the complaint of ASI Harender, wherein it was alleged that performing online crime and detection duty and searching on portal MHA India Cyber Crime Coordination Centre regarding online cyber fraud, they the suspected mobile number 9518051479 in the area of his police station. On getting location of the above mentioned mobile number, its user Tosif was apprehended along with the mobile and two fake SIM cards. During inve surfaced and, thus, he was arrayed as an accused. Apprehending arrest, the petitioner approached the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nuh for grant of concession of anticipatory bail, however, af the said relief was declined to him vide order dated 30.07.2025. Hence, 46297-2025 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Versus State of Haryana Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bhardwaj Mr. M.D. Khan, Advocate, for the petitioner. **** Rajesh Bhardwaj, J. Prayer in the present petition, filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in a case FIR 0110 dated 20.05.2025, registered under Sections 318(4), 319, 336(3), 338, 340 of the BNS, 2023, at Police Station Pinagwan, District Nuh. Succinctly, the facts of the case are that the pr registered on the complaint of ASI Harender, wherein it was alleged that performing online crime and detection duty and searching on portal MHA India Cyber Crime Coordination Centre regarding online cyber fraud, they suspected mobile number 9518051479, indulging in cyber fraud, in the area of his police station. On getting location of the above mentioned mobile number, its user Tosif was apprehended along with the mobile and two SIM cards. During investigation, complicity of the petitioner has been surfaced and, thus, he was arrayed as an accused. Apprehending arrest, the petitioner approached the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nuh for grant of concession of anticipatory bail, however, af the said relief was declined to him vide order dated 30.07.2025. Hence, - 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-46297-2025 (O&M) Decided on:22.08.2025 ...Petitioner ...Respondent Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bhardwaj Prayer in the present petition, filed under Section 482 of the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in a case FIR 0110 dated 20.05.2025, registered under Sections 318(4), 319, 336(3), 338, 340 of the BNS, 2023, at Police Station Pinagwan, District Nuh. Succinctly, the facts of the case are that the present FIR was registered on the complaint of ASI Harender, wherein it was alleged that while performing online crime and detection duty and searching on portal MHA India Cyber Crime Coordination Centre regarding online cyber fraud, they found that , indulging in cyber fraud, was active in the area of his police station. On getting location of the above mentioned mobile number, its user Tosif was apprehended along with the mobile and two stigation, complicity of the petitioner has been surfaced and, thus, he was arrayed as an accused. Apprehending arrest, the petitioner approached the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nuh for grant of concession of anticipatory bail, however, after hearing both the sides, the said relief was declined to him vide order dated 30.07.2025. Hence, ...Petitioner ...Respondent Prayer in the present petition, filed under Section 482 of the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in a case FIR 0110 dated 20.05.2025, registered under Sections 318(4), 319, 336(3), 338, esent FIR was while performing online crime and detection duty and searching on portal MHA India found that active in the area of his police station. On getting location of the above mentioned mobile number, its user Tosif was apprehended along with the mobile and two stigation, complicity of the petitioner has been surfaced and, thus, he was arrayed as an accused. Apprehending arrest, the petitioner approached the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nuh for ter hearing both the sides, the said relief was declined to him vide order dated 30.07.2025. Hence, VINOD KUMAR 2025.08.27 18:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-46297 aggrieved against the said order, the petitioner is before this Court by way of filing the present petition. 3. the petitioner has been falsely is submitted that the petitioner is not named in the arrayed as an accused on disclosure statement of the co even admissible in evidence. It is submitted that the FIR was registered against co-accused Tosif who regular bail by the JMIC, Punhana, on 27.05.2025. It is submitted that there is no specific allegations levelled against the petitioner and he has been falsely roped in only being real brother of co there being no concession of anticip 4. 5. accepts notice on behalf of the respondent application. He submits that during investigation, complicity of the petitioner has been duly established a offence. It is submitted that the recovery of fake SIM cards is yet to be effected from the petitioner and, thus, his custodial interrogation is essential. Thus, he submits that th dismissed. 6. available record, it is deciphered that the and co-accused Tosif was apprehended a complicity of the petitioner also surfaced and it was found that the petitioner is the real brother of co Rs.22,500/- 46297-2025 (O&M) aggrieved against the said order, the petitioner is before this Court by way of filing the present petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner has ve the petitioner has been falsely and frivolously implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the petitioner is not named in the arrayed as an accused on disclosure statement of the co even admissible in evidence. It is submitted that the FIR was registered against accused Tosif who was arrested on 20.05.2025 but he has been released on regular bail by the JMIC, Punhana, on 27.05.2025. It is submitted that there is fic allegations levelled against the petitioner and he has been falsely roped in only being real brother of co-accused Tosif. there being no prima facie case against the petitioner, concession of anticipatory bail. Notice of motion. On asking of the Court, Mr. Sumit Jain, Addl. A.G., Haryana, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent . He submits that during investigation, complicity of the petitioner been duly established as he had played an active role in the commission of offence. It is submitted that the recovery of fake SIM cards is yet to be effected from the petitioner and, thus, his custodial interrogation is essential. Thus, he submits that the present petition, being devoid of merit, deserves to be After hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the available record, it is deciphered that the FIR was registered by the Cyber Cell accused Tosif was apprehended at the spot. During investigation, complicity of the petitioner also surfaced and it was found that the petitioner is the real brother of co-accused Tosif who had committ by using fake SIM cards. Co - 2 - aggrieved against the said order, the petitioner is before this Court by way of Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently contended that and frivolously implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the petitioner is not named in the FIR; however, he has been arrayed as an accused on disclosure statement of the co-accused, which is not even admissible in evidence. It is submitted that the FIR was registered against arrested on 20.05.2025 but he has been released on regular bail by the JMIC, Punhana, on 27.05.2025. It is submitted that there is fic allegations levelled against the petitioner and he has been falsely accused Tosif. He further submitted that case against the petitioner, he deserves to be granted On asking of the Court, Mr. Sumit Jain, Addl. A.G., Haryana, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State and opposed the bail . He submits that during investigation, complicity of the petitioner he had played an active role in the commission of offence. It is submitted that the recovery of fake SIM cards is yet to be effected from the petitioner and, thus, his custodial interrogation is essential. e present petition, being devoid of merit, deserves to be After hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the FIR was registered by the Cyber Cell t the spot. During investigation, complicity of the petitioner also surfaced and it was found that the petitioner is accused Tosif who had committed cyber fraud of . Co-accused Tosif has specifica aggrieved against the said order, the petitioner is before this Court by way of hemently contended that and frivolously implicated in the present case. It however, he has been h is not even admissible in evidence. It is submitted that the FIR was registered against arrested on 20.05.2025 but he has been released on regular bail by the JMIC, Punhana, on 27.05.2025. It is submitted that there is fic allegations levelled against the petitioner and he has been falsely submitted that he deserves to be granted On asking of the Court, Mr. Sumit Jain, Addl. A.G., Haryana, opposed the bail . He submits that during investigation, complicity of the petitioner he had played an active role in the commission of offence. It is submitted that the recovery of fake SIM cards is yet to be effected from the petitioner and, thus, his custodial interrogation is essential. e present petition, being devoid of merit, deserves to be After hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the FIR was registered by the Cyber Cell t the spot. During investigation, complicity of the petitioner also surfaced and it was found that the petitioner is cyber fraud of accused Tosif has specifically VINOD KUMAR 2025.08.27 18:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-46297 disclosed that the mobile phone and fake SIM cards none-else but the petitioner. of the offences, the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner cannot be appr grant of concession of anticipatory bail. However, the same could be appreciated at the relevant stage. 7. are given under Section 482 (1) & (2) of BNSS which reads as under: 46297-2025 (O&M) disclosed that the mobile phone and fake SIM cards else but the petitioner. Thus, keeping in view the gravity and seriousness of the offences, the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner cannot be appreciated at this stage where he has approached this Court for the grant of concession of anticipatory bail. However, the same could be appreciated at the relevant stage. For the consideration of anticipatory bail, the statutory parameters under Section 482 (1) & (2) of BNSS which reads as under: “482. Direction for grant of bail to person apprehending arrest: 1. When any person has reason to believe that he may be arrested on an accusation of having committed a non may apply to the High Court or the Court of Session for a direction under this section; and that Court may, if it thinks fit, direct that in the event of such arrest, he shall be released on bail. 2. When the High Court or the Court of Session makes a d under sub-section (1), it may include such conditions in such directions in the light of the facts of the particular case, as it may think fit, including (i) a condition that the person shall make himself available for interrogation by a police required; (ii) a condition that the person shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; (iii) a condition that the person shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court; (iv) such other condition as may be imposed under sub section (3) of section 480, as if the bail were granted under that section.” - 3 - disclosed that the mobile phone and fake SIM cards were provided to him by Thus, keeping in view the gravity and seriousness of the offences, the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner eciated at this stage where he has approached this Court for the grant of concession of anticipatory bail. However, the same could be For the consideration of anticipatory bail, the statutory parameters under Section 482 (1) & (2) of BNSS which reads as under:- “482. Direction for grant of bail to person apprehending arrest: When any person has reason to believe that he may be arrested on an accusation of having committed a non-bailable offence, he may apply to the High Court or the Court of Session for a direction under this section; and that Court may, if it thinks fit, direct that in the event of such arrest, he shall be released on When the High Court or the Court of Session makes a direction section (1), it may include such conditions in such directions in the light of the facts of the particular case, as it a condition that the person shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when a condition that the person shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to ition that the person shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court; such other condition as may be imposed under sub section (3) of section 480, as if the bail were granted were provided to him by Thus, keeping in view the gravity and seriousness of the offences, the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner eciated at this stage where he has approached this Court for the grant of concession of anticipatory bail. However, the same could be For the consideration of anticipatory bail, the statutory parameters When any person has reason to believe that he may be arrested bailable offence, he may apply to the High Court or the Court of Session for a direction under this section; and that Court may, if it thinks fit, direct that in the event of such arrest, he shall be released on irection section (1), it may include such conditions in such directions in the light of the facts of the particular case, as it a condition that the person shall make himself available officer as and when a condition that the person shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to ition that the person shall not leave India without such other condition as may be imposed under sub- section (3) of section 480, as if the bail were granted VINOD KUMAR 2025.08.27 18:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-46297 8. Sharma, (1997) 7 SCC 187 9. Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia Vs. State of Punjab, AIR 1980 SC 1632 and again reiterated that w take into consideration the factors like gravity of offence, chances of accused tampering with the evidence and probabilities of his fleeing from justice etc. The Court should be circumspect about the as well. The anticipatory bail is an extraordinary discretion which should be exercised in the extraordinary circumstances. 10. apparent that the complicity of the petitioner has been The investigation is at its threshold. Thus, granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner at this stage w 46297-2025 (O&M) Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sta (1997) 7 SCC 187 has held as under: “6. We find force in the submission of the CBI that custodial interrogation is qualitatively more elicitation oriented than questioning a suspect who is well ensconded with a favo 438 if the code. In a case like this effective interrogation of suspected person is of tremendous advantage in disinterring many useful informations and also materials which would have been concealed. Succession such interrogation would elude if the suspected person knows that he is well protected and insulted by a pre the time he interrogated. Very often interrogation in such a condition would reduce to a mere ritual. The argument that the custodial interrogation is fraught with the danger of the person being subjected to third degree methods need not be countenanced, for, such an argument can be advanced by all accused in all criminal cases. The court has to presume that responsible Police Officers would conduct task of disinterring offences would not conduct themselves as offenders.” Hon’ble Apex Court in plethora of judicial precedents including Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia Vs. State of Punjab, AIR 1980 SC 1632 and again reiterated that while considering the anticipatory bail the Court is to take into consideration the factors like gravity of offence, chances of accused tampering with the evidence and probabilities of his fleeing from justice etc. The Court should be circumspect about the impact of its decision on the society as well. The anticipatory bail is an extraordinary discretion which should be exercised in the extraordinary circumstances. Weighing the facts of the case on the anvil of the law settled, it is apparent that the complicity of the petitioner has been The investigation is at its threshold. Thus, granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner at this stage would scuttle the ongoing investigation. - 4 - Hon'ble Supreme Court in State represented by CBI Vs. Anil has held as under:- “6. We find force in the submission of the CBI that custodial interrogation is qualitatively more elicitation oriented than questioning a suspect who is well ensconded with a favorable order under Section if the code. In a case like this effective interrogation of suspected person is of tremendous advantage in disinterring many useful informations and also materials which would have been concealed. would elude if the suspected person knows that he is well protected and insulted by a pre-arrest bail during the time he interrogated. Very often interrogation in such a condition would reduce to a mere ritual. The argument that the custodial n is fraught with the danger of the person being subjected to third degree methods need not be countenanced, for, such an argument can be advanced by all accused in all criminal cases. The court has to presume that responsible Police Officers would conduct themselves in task of disinterring offences would not conduct themselves as Hon’ble Apex Court in plethora of judicial precedents including Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia Vs. State of Punjab, AIR 1980 SC 1632, has time hile considering the anticipatory bail the Court is to take into consideration the factors like gravity of offence, chances of accused tampering with the evidence and probabilities of his fleeing from justice etc. impact of its decision on the society as well. The anticipatory bail is an extraordinary discretion which should be exercised in the extraordinary circumstances. Weighing the facts of the case on the anvil of the law settled, it is apparent that the complicity of the petitioner has been prima facie established. The investigation is at its threshold. Thus, granting anticipatory bail to the ould scuttle the ongoing investigation. CBI Vs. Anil “6. We find force in the submission of the CBI that custodial interrogation is qualitatively more elicitation oriented than questioning Section if the code. In a case like this effective interrogation of suspected person is of tremendous advantage in disinterring many useful informations and also materials which would have been concealed. would elude if the suspected person arrest bail during the time he interrogated. Very often interrogation in such a condition would reduce to a mere ritual. The argument that the custodial n is fraught with the danger of the person being subjected to third degree methods need not be countenanced, for, such an argument can be advanced by all accused in all criminal cases. The court has to themselves in task of disinterring offences would not conduct themselves as Hon’ble Apex Court in plethora of judicial precedents including , has time hile considering the anticipatory bail the Court is to take into consideration the factors like gravity of offence, chances of accused tampering with the evidence and probabilities of his fleeing from justice etc. impact of its decision on the society as well. The anticipatory bail is an extraordinary discretion which should be Weighing the facts of the case on the anvil of the law settled, it is established. The investigation is at its threshold. Thus, granting anticipatory bail to the VINOD KUMAR 2025.08.27 18:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-46297 11. Court is of the opinion that the petitioner does not qualify for exercising the extraordinary power by this Court in their favour. Resultantly, petition, being devoid of any merit, is hereby dismissed. 12. on the merits of the case. August 22, 2025 vinod* 46297-2025 (O&M) In view of the facts and circumstances of the present case, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner does not qualify for exercising the extraordinary power by this Court in their favour. Resultantly, petition, being devoid of any merit, is hereby dismissed. Nothing said herein shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. August 22, 2025 Whether Speaking/Reasoned: Whether Reportable: - 5 - In view of the facts and circumstances of the present case, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner does not qualify for exercising the extraordinary power by this Court in their favour. Resultantly, 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 In view of the facts and circumstances of the present case, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner does not qualify for exercising the the present Nothing said herein shall be construed as an expression of opinion VINOD KUMAR 2025.08.27 18:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document