Sonu Alias Golu v. State Of Haryana

CRM-M-18400-2026 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-18400-2026 Date of decision : 10.04.2026 Date of uploading :16.04.2026 Sonu Alias Golu .............Petitioner

Versus

State Of Haryana .......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL

Present:

Mr. Roshan Lal Saini, Advocate, for Mr. Nitish Yadav, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Deepak Kumar Grewal, DAG, Haryana.

--- SUMEET GOEL, J. (ORAL) 1.

Present petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNSS') for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.04 dated 05.01.2025 under Sections 318(4) and 61(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, registered at Police Station Cyber Crime Rewari.

2.

The case set up in the FIR in question (as set out in the present petition by the petitioner) is as follows:- 'To SHO Sir, Cyber Branch Rewari I request that I am Kirti DO Shakti Singh resident of Sudhrana District Rewari. On 31st December 2024, I received a message on WhatsApp Number 8957656923. They told me that I will get money for reviewing restaurant on Google Maps. After that, they asked me to contact Radhika Sharma on Telegram whose ID is @Radhika Sharma256. After that, Radhika gave me tasks of doing Google Review. After getting some tasks done, she asked me to deposit Rs 1000 in one task and said that you will get Rs 1400 for this. Similarly, they got another task done in which they took Rs 3000 deposit and refunded Rs 3800. After that

CRM-M-18400-2026 -2he asked me to contact another person on Telegram with the ID @vcoins Teacher. This person then gave me tasks and asked me to deposit money. First, he asked for a deposit of Rs 7000 then Rs 29120 then Rs 50000 then Rs 10000 then Rs 18000. A total of Rs 114120 has been deposited by Me. Strictest action should be taken against them Thank you Sd/- Kirti. Name Kirti, Fathers name Shri Shakti Singh Village Sudhrana District Rewari, 123303 Mobile number 8307358240 From the contents of said statement, on finding the offence under Sections 318(4) of BNS to be made out.' 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner is in custody since 03.10.2025. Learned counsel has further argued that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the FIR in question. Learned counsel has further submitted that co-accused namely Soyal @ Soyal Nirban has already been granted the concession of regular bail by this Court vide order dated 09.02.2026 passed in CRM-M-1812-2026. Learned counsel has further submitted that, in any case, investigation qua the FIR is complete and trial is underway wherein the FIR-complainant has been examined as a prosecution witness and has turned hostile on 2.1.2026. Thus, regular bail is prayed for.

4.

Learned State counsel has opposed the present petition by arguing that the allegations raised are serious in nature and thus the petitioner does not deserve the concession of the regular bail. Learned State counsel seeks to place on record custody certificate dated 10.04.2026 in Court, which is taken on record. 5.

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

6.

The petitioner was arrested on 03.10.2025 and stated to be in continuous custody since then. It is not in dispute that pursuant to investigation having been completed, challan stands presented on

CRM-M-18400-2026 -33.10.2025, wherein 10 prosecution witnesses have been cited and only 01 has been examined till date. Thus, culmination of trial will take long. It is not in dispute that co-accused namely Soyal @ Soyal Nirban has already been granted the concession of regular bail by this Court. The rival contentions, including the weightage required to be attached to the testimony of hostile witness PW-1 Kirti (FIR-complainant); shall be gone into 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 10.04.2026 filed by learned State counsel, the petitioner has already suffered incarceration for a period of 6 months and 8 days & is not shown to be 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 CJM/Duty Magistrate. However, in addition to conditions that may be imposed by the concerned CJM/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

CRM-M-18400-2026 -4Court. (vi) The petitioner shall give his cell-phone number to the Investigating 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 CJM/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) JUDGE 10.04.2026 jatin Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No