Abhishek v. State Of Haryana

CRM-M-21819-2025 - 1 -

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-21819-2025 Decided on : 05.09.2025 Abhishek . . . Petitioner(s)

Versus

State of Haryana . . . Respondent(s)

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH PRESENT: Mr. Aditya Jain, Advocate for the petitioner(s).

Mr. P.K. Jhanda, Sr. DAG, Haryana.

**** SANJAY VASHISTH, J. (Oral) 1.

At the outset, learned State counsel has filed the custody certificate dated 04.09.2025 in Court today, which is taken on record, subject to all just exceptions. Office to tag the same at appropriate place. Copy there of has been handed over to the opposite counsel. 2.

The instant petition has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 439 Cr.P.C.), for grant of regular bail to the petitioner, during the pendency of trial, who has been booked in a criminal case arising out of First Information Report, as detailed here-under:- Name of Petitioner(s) FIR No.

Date Section(s) Police Station District Abhishek 08.01.2025 318(4) of BNS, 2023 Cyber Crime Central, Faridabad Faridabad 3.

Allegations against the petitioner is that he cheated the complainant by defrauding him of an amount of Rs.3,45,037/- on the pretext of providing Government Job in the Police Department of Uttar Pradesh. 4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after completion of investigation, challan has already been submitted on 23.04.2025, however, charges are yet to be framed. Further, the offence is triable by the Court of Ld. Magistrate and conclusion of trial shall take considerable time. 5.

Learned counsel contends that after registration of the case, he has already suffered incarceration of more than 09 months period and except JAWALA RAM 2025.09.05 18:16 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

CRM-M-21819-2025 - 2 - present case, no other case has been registered against the petitioner. At this stage, nothing is to be recovered from the petitioner's possession and the case would much depend upon the documentary, scientific and electronic evidence.

6.

On the other hand, learned State counsel has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. However, he is unable to controvert any of the factual submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner or those recorded here-above.

7.

Considering the totality of circumstances, and the submissions addressed by both sides, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I deem it appropriate to grant the concession of bail to the petitioner. 8.

Consequently, prayer made in the present petition is allowed. Petitioner is ordered to be released on bail, subject to his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/ Chief Judicial Magistrate/ Illaqa Magistrate/ Duty Magistrate concerned, if not required in any other case. 9.

Needless to observe that the petitioner shall not extend any threat and shall not influence any prosecution witness in any manner directly or indirectly.

10.

The observation made here-in-above shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the facts of the case and the Trial Court is expected to decide the case on the basis of complete evidence available on record. 11.

Petition stands disposed of.

(SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE September 05, 2025 J.Ram Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether Reportable:

Yes/No JAWALA RAM 2025.09.05 18:16 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document