CRM-M-27407-2026 1 220 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-27407-2026 Date of Decision: 22.07.2026 MANOJ ...Petitioner Vs. STATE OF HARYANA ...Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIRINDER AGGARWAL Present: Mr. Jasvinder Rao, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Tanuj Sharma, AAG, Haryana. VIRINDER AGGARWAL , J. (Oral) 1. The present petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding to Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973), seeking the concession of regular bail during the pendency of trial in FIR No. 51 dated 26.12.2025, registered under Sections 318(4), 61 and 238(c) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding to Sections 420, 120-B and 201 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860), at Police Station Cyber Crime, District Narnaul, Haryana (Annexure P- 1). 2. As per the prosecution case, the present FIR was registered on the complaint of the proprietor of a petrol pump alleging that on 24.11.2025, co- accused Naveen visited the petrol pump and got fuel filled worth Rs.780/-, for which he made an online payment through QR code. Thereafter, he requested the petrol pump salesman to provide him Rs.35,000/- in cash on the pretext of an urgent medical requirement, assuring that the said amount would be transferred online to the petrol pump account. Acting upon the said representation, the complainant agreed and co-accused Naveen allegedly KUMUD VERMA 2026.07.23 18:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-27407-2026 2 transferred two amounts of Rs.15,000/- and Rs.20,000/- through QR code into the petrol pump account, after which the salesman handed over Rs.35,000/- in cash to him. Subsequently, on 27.11.2025, the complainant came to know that a hold had been placed on his bank account and, upon verification from the bank, it was revealed that the said transactions, including the fuel payment, had originated from another bank account and were linked with cyber fraud, causing wrongful loss to the complainant. The complainant thereafter contacted co-accused Naveen, who allegedly assured him that the issue would be resolved but failed to do so. On suspicion that Naveen was acting in connivance with cyber fraudsters, the complainant approached the police, resulting in registration of the present FIR. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and there is no direct or cogent evidence connecting him with the alleged offence. It is contended that the FIR was registered against co-accused Naveen and the petitioner has been nominated subsequently on the basis of disclosure statements without any independent corroborative material. 3.1 Learned counsel further submits that no amount was ever transferred into the account of the petitioner and no bank account, UPI account, mobile wallet or digital trail has been linked with him. It is argued that there is no monetary benefit or financial gain shown to have been received by the petitioner and, therefore, his implication is based merely upon suspicion and presumptions. 3.2 It is further submitted that the petitioner was arrested on the basis of a disclosure statement of co-accused and the alleged notice under Section KUMUD VERMA 2026.07.23 18:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-27407-2026 3 35(3) BNSS was issued and arrest was effected on the same day, without granting any reasonable opportunity to comply with the notice. Learned counsel contends that the manner of arrest itself raises serious doubts regarding the fairness of the investigation. 3.3 Learned counsel further submits that the investigation is complete, the challan has already been presented before the learned Trial Court and no further recovery is required from the petitioner. The petitioner has remained in custody since 27.12.2025, has clean antecedents and is not required for any further custodial interrogation. It is also submitted that the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude, particularly when the main accused has not yet been arrested. 3.4 Learned counsel relies upon the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court regarding personal liberty and submits that continued incarceration of the petitioner would amount to pre-trial punishment. The petitioner undertakes to abide by all conditions imposed by this Court and not to misuse the concession of bail. 4. Notice of motion. 5. Mr. Tanuj Sharma, learned Assistant Advocate General, Haryana, has put in appearance on behalf of the respondent-State and has filed the custody certificate dated 20.07.2026, which is taken on record, subject to all just exceptions. As per the custody certificate, the petitioner has already undergone a total custody period of 06 months and 23 days. 6. Per contra, learned State counsel opposed the bail application and submitted that the allegations against the applicant-accused are serious in nature. It was contended that the applicant-accused was actively involved in KUMUD VERMA 2026.07.23 18:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-27407-2026 4 the alleged cyber fraud syndicate and was allegedly providing bank accounts of various persons to the members of the syndicate for routing the proceeds of crime. It was further alleged that the applicant-accused was supplying kits used by cyber criminals for carrying out fraudulent activities for monetary consideration. It was argued that the actual fraud was committed upon another victim in South India and the amount was routed through the complainant's account as part of the modus operandi of the cyber fraud syndicate. 7. Be that as it may, considering the custody period already undergone by the petitioner, who has remained in judicial custody since 27.12.2025, and the fact that the investigation stands completed and the challan has already been presented before the learned Trial Court, the petitioner is no longer required for custodial interrogation. It is also relevant to note that the allegations against the petitioner primarily arise out of the alleged disclosure statements of co-accused and there is no direct evidence, financial trail, bank account, UPI account or digital linkage connecting the petitioner with the alleged cyber fraud. Further, no recovery is required to be effected from the petitioner. The offences alleged against the petitioner are triable by the learned Magistrate and the trial is likely to take considerable time to reach its logical conclusion. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the continued incarceration of the petitioner would not serve any useful purpose. 8. Reliance is placed upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Dataram Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Another, 2018 (2) R.C.R. (Criminal) 131, wherein it has been held that grant of bail is the rule and refusal thereof is an exception, and that a person is presumed to be innocent until proven guilty. It is further submitted that the right to speedy trial forms KUMUD VERMA 2026.07.23 18:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-27407-2026 5 an integral part of the right to life and personal liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, and the same has been consistently recognised by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, including in Balwinder Singh v. State of Punjab & Another (SLO (Crl.) No. 8523/2024). In these circumstances, continued incarceration of the petitioner would serve no useful purpose, particularly when the trial can be effectively safeguarded by imposing appropriate conditions. 9. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed, and the petitioner is ordered to be admitted on regular bail, subject to furnishing requisite bail and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned/Illaqa Magistrate/Duty Magistrate, as the case may be, and further subject to the following conditions:- 1. The petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat, or promise to any person acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the case so as to dissuade such person from disclosing such facts before the Court or to the investigating agency. 2. The petitioner shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner whatsoever, nor shall attempt, directly or indirectly, to influence, intimidate, or contact any prosecution witness. 3. The petitioner shall not leave the territorial limits of India without obtaining the prior permission of the learned Trial Court. In the event he is in possession of a passport, he shall furnish its particulars before the Investigating Officer as well as the learned Trial Court. 4. The learned Illaqa Magistrate/Duty Magistrate, before accepting the bail and surety bonds, shall obtain from the petitioner his permanent residential address as well as present correspondence address, duly supported by appropriate documentary proof. The Investigating Officer shall verify the correctness of the said addresses within 48 hours from the KUMUD VERMA 2026.07.23 18:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-27407-2026 6 acceptance of the bail bonds and shall place a verification report on the record. In the event either of the addresses is found to be false, fictitious, or incorrect, it shall be open to the prosecution to seek cancellation of the concession of bail in accordance with law. 5. The petitioner shall furnish before the learned Trial Court, either at the time of furnishing the bail bonds or within such period as may be specified by the Court, Permanent Account Number (PAN), Aadhaar Number, particulars of all operative bank accounts, and a declaration disclosing details of immovable properties, if any. Any concealment of material particulars or furnishing of false information shall constitute a valid ground for seeking cancellation of bail in accordance with law. 6. The petitioner shall intimate the Investigating Officer as well as the learned Trial Court, in writing, of any change in residential address or mobile number within seven days from the date of such change. 7. The petitioner shall not commit any offence of a similar nature during the pendency of the trial and shall remain present before the learned Trial Court on each and every date fixed, unless his personal appearance is exempted in accordance with law. He shall not absent himself from the proceedings without obtaining prior permission of the learned Trial Court. In the event of any violation of the aforesaid conditions or his unauthorized absence from the trial proceedings, it shall be open to the learned Trial Court to proceed in accordance with law, including cancellation of the concession of regular bail and issuance of appropriate coercive process, including warrants of arrest. (VIRINDER AGGARWAL) JUDGE 22.07.2026 kv Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No KUMUD VERMA 2026.07.23 18:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh