108 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-36406-2026 DECIDED ON: 08.07.2026 ASHU ALIAS AASHU .....PETITIONER VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER .....RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH. Present: Mr. Devender Arya, Advocate, and Mr. Amit Jangra, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Pawan Kumar Garg, DAG, Haryana. Mr. Aman Yadav, Advocate, for respondent No.2. SANJAY VASHISTH , J (ORAL) 1. Present petition has been filed by the petitioner, seeking grant of anticipatory bail, in case, FIR No.25, dated 15.08.2025, under Sections 318(4), 61(2) of BNS (corresponding to sections 420, 120-B of IPC), registered at Cyber Police Station Mahendergarh, District Mahendergarh. 2. FIR was registered on the complaint of one Ajay, who alleged that on 20.12.2024, he received a message on WhatsApp offering an opportunity to earn money by working from home and inviting him to join a Telegram group. Acting upon the said representation, complainant joined the Telegram group and, on inducement and allurement extended by the unknown persons operating the group, started investing money. After depositing total amount Rs.2,35,000/-, when complainant sought LAVISHA 2026.07.08 18:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC, Chandigarh CRM-M-36406-2026 -2- refund of his investment, the accused persons refused to return the amount and the WhatsApp group was subsequently deleted. Consequently, complainant lodged Online Cyber Complaint No.21303250012602 on 20.12.2024, along with the transaction details pertaining to the amount of Rs.2,35,000/-, pursuant to which present FIR came to be registered. 3. Learned State counsel, upon instructions, submits that there are four accused in the present case, namely, Sachin Dhiman, Arya Mishra, Dhanraj Verma and Ashu alias Aashu (present petitioner). It is further submitted that an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- out of the defrauded amount was credited to the bank account of the petitioner and was subsequently withdrawn by him through a cheque. It is also pointed out that, apart from the present case, petitioner is involved in another case of a similar nature. 4. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the entire defrauded amount of Rs.2,35,000/- has since been returned to the complainant after registration of the FIR, and, therefore, dispute now stands amicably resolved between the parties. 5. A perusal of the record reveals that petitioner had earlier approached this Court by filing CRM-M-56252-2025 (Annexure P-4) seeking quashing of FIR on the basis of a compromise. However, vide order dated 01.04.2026, Coordinate Bench of this Court declined to entertain the prayer, by observing that, in cases involving cyber fraud, question of quashing of the FIR, solely on the basis of a compromise LAVISHA 2026.07.08 18:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC, Chandigarh CRM-M-36406-2026 -3- does not arise. Consequently, petitioner withdrew the said petition on the same date. 6. Merely because petitioner is 21-year-old student and has subsequently refunded the defrauded amount to the complainant after registration of the FIR, no ground is made out for grant of extraordinary relief of anticipatory bail. Repayment of the amount may satisfy the complainant individually, but it does not remove the seriousness of alleged offence, which is affecting society at large. Cyber fraud has assumed alarming proportions, and such offences require a strict approach. State is under an obligation to effectively deal with persons indulging in such criminal activities, as members of the public remain vulnerable to victimisation through cyber fraud. 7. In view of the above circumstances, this Court does not find any ground to extend the concession of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Consequently, present petition is dismissed. (SANJAY VASHISTH) 08.07.2026 JUDGE Lavisha Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No LAVISHA 2026.07.08 18:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC, Chandigarh