CRM-M No.17092 of 2026 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 224 CRM-M No.17092 of 2026 Date of decision: 20.07.2026 Gaurav @ Goru ... Petitioner Vs. State of Haryana ... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Present:- Mr. G.P.S. Ghuman, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Neeraj Poswal, AAG, Haryana, for the respondent-State. ---- MANISHA BATRA, J. (Oral) 1. The instant one is the third petition as filed by the petitioner under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (For short “BNSS”) seeking regular bail in case arising out of FIR No.0015 dated 08.05.2024 registered under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B of IPC at Police Station Cyber Crime, Rewari, District Rewari. His previous first petition bearing CRM-M-13971-2025 had been dismissed vide order dated 04.08.2025 whereas the second petition bearing CRM- M-2142-2026 had been dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 17.02.2026. 2. The complainant Manoj Sharma who had been made a victim of cyber crime by being induced to indulge in online trading and to part with a sum of Rs.13,34,500/-, has lodged the aforementioned FIR by MANJU 2026.07.21 10:51 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order /judgment Chandigarh CRM-M No.17092 of 2026 -2- alleging that wrongful loss of the aforementioned amount of money was caused to him and he had been cheated. After registration of FIR, the transactions of bank accounts of the complainant were analyzed and details of beneficiary account were obtained on the basis of which accused Manjeet Singh was arrested in this case. The arrest of Manjeet Singh led to apprehension of the present petitioner and co-accused Monty on whose behest accused Manjeet Singh had opened an account in the name of a firm by showing himself as a proprietor. On his arrest on 18.11.2024, the petitioner suffered a disclosure statement to the effect that he had got opened bank accounts from different persons in connivance with accused Monty and out of greed of money. Subsequently, other accused were also arrested and presently, the petitioner along with the co-accused is facing trial for commission of the aforementioned offences. 3. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that he has been in custody for a period of more than about 1 year and 8 months. He is not required for further investigation. The trial will take considerable time to conclude. The co-accused Manjeet Singh has been extended benefit of bail. On parity, he deserves to be extended the same concession. His involvement in other cases cannot be considered to be a reason for denying benefit of bail to him. He is not beneficiary of any transaction. Each day spent by him in custody has furnished a new ground to him to seek concession of bail. It is, thus, argued that the MANJU 2026.07.21 10:51 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order /judgment Chandigarh CRM-M No.17092 of 2026 -3- petition deserves to be allowed. 4. Per contra, learned State counsel has vehemently argued that the petition is not maintainable at all the same being successive petition and there being no substantial and drastic change in the circumstances. It is also argued that the petitioner is a habitual offender being involved in three other cases two of which are of similar nature. There are chances of his absconding or committing similar offences, if extended benefit of bail. It is, therefore, stressed that the petition does not deserve to be allowed. 5. This Court has considered the rival submissions. 6. The petitioner was one of the conspirators in the conspiracy hatched with the co-accused to cheat public persons of their hard earned money by providing mule accounts to the online fraudsters. The allegations levelled against the petitioner are duly supported by investigation and his role has clearly emerged during investigation. The offences allegedly committed by him are not an isolated act but are part of an organized cyber fraud wherein banking channels form a crucial link in the execution of crime. It goes without saying that cyber crimes are increasing at a fast speed and are having a deep rooted impact on the society targeting unsuspecting citizens and eroding public confidence in digital platforms. The subject offences are serious economic crimes which affect not only the victim but the financial system of the country at large. As such, a strict approach is required to be adopted at the stage of MANJU 2026.07.21 10:51 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order /judgment Chandigarh CRM-M No.17092 of 2026 -4- grant of bail itself. The first petition filed by the petitioner had been dismissed by this Court by passing a detailed order on 04.08.2025 Thereafter the petitioner moved another application which was dismissed as withdrawn on 17.02.2026. The instant one is the third successive petition. Apart from the plea of prolonged incarceration, the petitioner has failed to point out any drastic change in the circumstances so as to seek bail as a matter of right. In cases of serious nature like this, mere prolonged period of custody is not sufficient ground for enlarging an accused on bail. The bail of the co-accused Manjeet Singh cannot be considered to be a reason for granting benefit of bail to the petitioner against whom there are graver allegations. More so, the trial is going at a proper pace as 06 out of 12 witnesses have already stand examined and there is nothing on record to show that there would be any undue delay in conclusion of the same. Taking into consideration the above discussed facts, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petition does not deserve to be allowed. Accordingly, the same is dismissed. 7. It is, however, clarified that observations made hereinabove shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. (MANISHA BATRA) 20.07.2026 JUDGE manju Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No MANJU 2026.07.21 10:51 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order /judgment Chandigarh