Gilitvala Ketan Natvarlal v. State Of Haryana

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: 06.04.2026 Gilitvala Ketan Natvarlal

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana

...Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY ***** Present :

Mr. Sahil Choudhary, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Gautam Kaile, DAG, Haryana.

***** AMAN CHAUDHARY, J. (ORAL) 1.

Prayer in the present petition filed under Section 483 BNSS is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.144 dated 14.10.2024, registered under Sections 318(4) BNS/420 IPC, 336(3) BNS/468 IPC, 338 BNS/467 IPC, 340(2) BNS/471 IPC, 61(2) BNS/120-B IPC, at Police Station Cyber Crime Police Station Panipat, Haryana.

2.

Learned counsel contends that the petitioner has been in custody for 9 months, 16 days. His name surfaced based on the disclosure statements of co-accused Jaideep Patel and Parth Radoria, who have been granted bail. There is no evidence to connect him with them. No amount has been received in his account while Rs.40 lacs in the account of the firm of Lungariya Dharmik who has since been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 19.02.2026, Annexure P8, after being in custody for 8 months, 3 days as also co-accused Ashish Badke, vide order dated 12.09.2025 who had received Rs.30 lacs, after being in custody for 6 months, 22 days. 7 more co-accused have been granted bail vide orders, Annexures P2 to P8. Challan has been presented on 01.09.2025, charges have now recently been framed on 12.03.2026 and in all there are 39 PWs. He is not involved in any other case.

3.

The custody certificate dated 02.04.2026 filed by the learned State

counsel is taken on record. As per the same, the petitioner is behind bars for 9 months and 16 days.

4.

Learned State counsel opposes the bail on the ground that the complainant was lured for investing in the share trading on the pretext of doubling the amount in 6 months by the main accused Lungariya Dharmik, whereafter amount was deposited by him. She, however, is unable to controvert with regard to stage, petitioner being not involved in any other case and coaccused having been enlarged on bail. 5.

Heard.

6.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, in particular that the petitioner is in custody for last 9 months and 16 days; not involved in any other case; co-accused are on bail; Challan stands presented on 01.09.2025, charges have been framed on 12.03.2026 and there are total 39 PWs, the trial is likely to take a considerable time, further incarceration of the petitioner would be violative of his right enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the present petition is allowed.

7.

The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail, subject to furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned, if not required in any other case and shall abide by the following conditions:- (i) The petitioner will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

(ii) The petitioner will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witnesses.

(iii) The petitioner will appear before the trial Court on each and every date fixed, unless is exempted by a specific order of Court.

(iv) The petitioner shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which, he is an accused, or for commission of which he is suspected of.

(v) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly coerce, induce, threaten or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/ her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence in any manner.

(vi) The petitioner shall not in any manner misuse his liberty.

(vii) The petitioner shall furnish his address and mobile number by way of an affidavit to the trial Court and

not change the same till conclusion of trial and if for any reasons, he seeks to change either of the aforesaid, it shall be done only with prior information to the learned trial Court.

(viii) The petitioner shall not leave the country without prior permission of the trial Court.

(ix) The trial Court/Duty Magistrate may impose any other condition, as deemed appropriate while releasing the petitioner.

8.

It is made abundantly clear that in case there is any breach of the aforesaid conditions, the State shall be at liberty to seek cancellation of bail as granted to the petitioner by this order.

9.

In view of the above, it is clarified that the observations made herein above are limited for the purpose of present proceedings and would not be construed as any opinion on the merits of the case and the trial would proceed independently of the aforesaid observations. (AMAN CHAUDHARY) JUDGE 06.04.2026 ashok Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes / No Whether reportable :

Yes / No