Ankit Raikwar Alias Minti Alias Rajesh v. State Of Haryana

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 19.03.2026 Date of Uploading: 19.03.2026 Ankit Raikwar @ Minti @ Rajesh .....Petitioner.

Versus

State of Haryana .....Respondent.

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL ***** Present:- Mr. Aakash Rana, Advocate for Mr. Sandeep Kumar, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Gurmeet Singh, AAG, Haryana.

SUMEET GOEL, J.(Oral) Present petition has been filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (439 of Cr.P.C.), for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR No.104 dated 25.11.2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 308(5), (386 of IPC), 318(4), (420 of IPC), 319, (416 of IPC), 336(3), (468 of IPC), 338, (467 of IPC), 340, (470 of IPC), 351(2), (506 of IPC), 61, (120-B of IPC) of the BNS, 2023, at Police Station Cyber Sonipat, District Sonipat. 2.

The case set up in the FIR in question (as set out in the present petition by the petitioner) is as follows:- "To Mr. S. H.O. Sahib, Police Station Cyber Crime, Sonipat Sir, It is requested that I Vinod Chaudhary son of Shri Shanti Sarpar Chaudhary resident of 255, Model Town,

-2Sonipat. On 06.11:2024 I received a call on my mobile no. 9896224636 from 9788614643 and after some time again a call came on my mobile from mobile no. 9918085847 and I was told that your name is registered in Ashok Gupta Money Laundering Case (Case No. 2212186) and there is an arrest warrant against you. Thereafter, I received detail of FIR DL1045_1024 on whatsapp from mobile 8959858412 and copy of arrest warrant was also sent. But at that time I was in Faridabad due to death of a relative and I said that I will come to Sonipat on 11.11.2024. After that on 12.11.2024 again a call came from mobile no. 8093278491 and arrest warrant was sent to me and I was threatened and me and my family's bank details were demanded from me. Then on 13.11.2024, I was asked for my complete daily routine details, which I gave in writing. Thereafter, from 14.11.2024 to 20.11.2024, as per their instructions, I transferred Rs.1,78,55,000/- to different accounts through Rutgers. The details of which are given below:- Sr.

No.

Date Account Debited from Account credited to IFSC Code Transaction ID Amount Rs.

14.11.2024 030201519399 0119619000005155 xxxx xxxx 43,50,000/- 16.11.2024 919010072421194 43183842370 xxxx xxxx 61,30,000/- 18.11.2024 030201520352 502000494653682 xxxx xxxx 31,80,000/ 18.11.2024 3077281424 1251000102100287 xxxx xxxx 7,30,000/- 19.11.2024 021999300000056 16020100011534 xxxx xxxx 5,50,000/- 19.11.2024 51027766168 160201000011534 xxxx xxxx 1,70,000/- 20.11.2024 030201519399 24190110147405 xxxx xxxx 27,45,000/- Total xxxx xxxx 1,78,55,000/- Apart from this, my other number 9996189066, which was with my wife, I started receiving whatsapp calls on that after 16.11.2024 from no. 8093296026 and my RTG transfer details were asked. Then on 17.11.2024, I was asked to leave my house and stay in a hotel for security reasons. I and my wife both stayed at another place, Hotel Mehul Maama bhanaja Chowk Sonipat on 17.11.

2024 and we were asked to stay in the hotel till the night of 18.11.2024 and during that time we were also asked to transfer through RTGS. From 12.11.2024 to till today, I am getting their calls and we are being asked to stay on live camera; like they used to keep us online earlier. Now I have come to know that by posing as fake police personnel and making fake Whatsapp calls and by opening accounts on the basis of fake documents, they have defrauded me of Rs. 1,78,55,000/-. For this I have lodged an online complaint 21311240051195 against them. I request you to take legal action against them and get my money back. Sd/- Vinod Parthi Vinod Chaudhary, H.No. 255, Model Town, Sonipat M. No.9896224636."

-33.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner is in custody since 03.12.2024. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated into the FIR in question. Learned counsel has further submitted that petitioner is involved into the FIR in question on the basis of disclosure statement of co-accused Sanjeev Kumar, who already stands released on regular bail vide order dated 11.02.2026 passed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in CRM-M No.30784 of 2025. Learned counsel has further submitted that similarly placed co-accused, namely, Ishan Baghel and Ravinder alias Ravi Beniwal have already been granted bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 14.05.2025 passed in CRM-M No.15006 of 2025. Learned counsel has further submitted that the petitioner is a man of clean antecedents. Thus, regular bail is prayed for. 4.

Learned State counsel has opposed the present petition by arguing that the allegations raised against the petitioner are serious in nature and, thus, he does not deserve the concession of the regular bail. Learned State counsel seeks to place on record custody certificate dated 18.03.2026 in the Court, which is taken on record. 5.

I have heard counsel for the rival parties and have gone through the available records of the case.

6.

The petitioner was arrested on 03.12.2024, whereinafter investigation was carried out and Challan was presented on 27.02.2025. Total 40 prosecution witnesses have been cited and it is conceded case before this Court that none has been examined till date and charges are yet

-4to be framed. The rival contentions raised at Bar give rise to debatable issues, which shall be ratiocinated upon during the course of trial. This Court does not deem it appropriate to delve deep into these rival contentions, at this stage, lest it may prejudice the trial. Nothing tangible has been brought forward to indicate the likelihood of the petitioner absconding from the process of justice or interfering with the prosecution evidence.

6.1.

As per custody certificate dated 18.03.2026 filed by the learned State counsel, the petitioner has already suffered incarceration for a period of about 01 year, 03 months and 16 days and he is not involved in any other case.

Suffice to say, further detention of the petitioner as an undertrial is not warranted in the facts and circumstances of the case. 7.

In view of above, the present petition is allowed. Petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Ld. concerned trial Court/Duty Magistrate. However, in addition to conditions that may be imposed by the concerned trial Court/Duty Magistrate, the petitioner shall remain bound by the following conditions:

(i) The petitioner shall not mis-use the liberty granted. (ii) The petitioner shall not tamper with any evidence, oral or documentary, during the trial.

(iii) The petitioner shall not absent himself on any date before the trial.

(iv) The petitioner shall not commit any offence while on bail. (v) The petitioner shall deposit his passport, if any, with the trial Court.

(vi) The petitioner shall give his cellphone number to the

-5Investigating Officer/SHO of concerned Police Station and shall not change his cell-phone number without prior permission of the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate.

(vii) The petitioner shall not in any manner try to delay the trial. 8.

In case of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions and those which may be imposed by concerned trial Court/Duty Magistrate as directed hereinabove or upon showing any other sufficient cause, the State/complainant shall be at liberty to move cancellation of bail of the petitioner.

9.

Ordered accordingly.

10.

Nothing said hereinabove shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.

(SUMEET GOEL) March 19, 2026 JUDGE Yag Dutt Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable:

Yes/No