CRM-M-48475 of 2025 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 210 CRM-M-48475 of 2025 Date of Decision: 05.09.2025 Karan Sharma ....Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ....Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL Present: Mr. Vaibhav Mittal, Advocate and Mr. Shivansh Mahajan, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Amit Shukla, AAG, Punjab. ***** RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL, J (ORAL) 1. Prayer in the instant petition filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.12 dated 03.02.2025 registered under Sections 61(2), 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, at Police Station Cyber Crime, Patiala. 2. Brief facts of the prosecution are that initial complaints were received online through helpline No.1930, which were forwarded to the Cyber Crime, Police Station, Patiala. Upon enquiry and verification, it was found that unknown persons had committed fraud to the tune of Rs.20,50,440/- in the name of investment in a company. Consequently, the instant FIR was registered and during investigation, it was found that the petitioner is the main mastermind of the fraud. He used different mobile DINESH BANSAL 2025.09.05 17:18 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-48475 of 2025 -2- phones with different SIM cards, issued in name of different persons. He further put the defrauded money in the account of other persons. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and he has no concern with the said offence. He argued that initially the FIR was registered against unknown persons. The petitioner is in custody since 02.05.2025. There is no other case against the petitioner. The investigation in the case is complete and challan also stands presented. He further submits that the trial will take a long time to conclude and no useful purpose would be served by keeping him behind the bars. Therefore, it is urged that the petition deserves to be allowed. 4. Notice of motion. 5. Learned State counsel, who has appeared on advance notice of petition, has filed the custody certificate of the petitioner, which is taken on record. He has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail by submitting that the offence committed by the petitioner is serious. He has further submitted that the petitioner is a first time offender as he is not involved in any other case. 6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties at length and after perusing the record of the case, it is evident that the petitioner is in custody for the last four months, investigation is complete; challan stands presented, and the fact that trial may take a long time to conclude, no useful purpose would be served by detaining him in further custody. Keeping the petitioner in further detention without the prospect of the trial being concluded in the near future would be violative of his rights under Article 21 of the DINESH BANSAL 2025.09.05 17:18 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-48475 of 2025 -3- Constitution of India. 7. In view of the above, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/Duty Magistrate/CJM concerned. It is clarified that nothing stated herein shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. (RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL) 05.09.2025 JUDGE D.Bansal Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No DINESH BANSAL 2025.09.05 17:18 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh