Mohd Sarik Ali v. State Of Haryana

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-21264-2026 Date of decision: 24.04.2026 MOHD SARIK ALI ......Petitioner

VERSUS

STATE OF HARYANA .......Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD S. BHARDWAJ ***** Present: - Mr. Rohit Kumar, Advocate and Ms. Yashika Walia, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Paras Talwar, Senior DAG, Haryana.

***** VINOD S. BHARDWAJ, J. (Oral) 1.

The instant first petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for the grant of regular bail in case bearing FIR No. 64 dated 04.10.2024, registered under Section(s) 61(2), 318(4), 319(2), 308(2), 238 of BNS, 2023 and 66-C of Information & Technology Act at Police Station Cyber Crime, Kurukshetra. 2.

Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner contends that the case of the petitioner is at par with co-accused Mohd. Sameer to whom concession of regular bail has already been granted vide order dated 18.03.2026 passed in CRM-M-71112 of 2025. He contends that the petitioner is alleged to have sold his account to Mohd. Sameer and that in the VISHAL SHARMA 2026.04.27 10:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M-21264-2026 -2said account the alleged financial transactions had been undertaken. It is submitted that the petitioner has clean antecedents and is not involved in any other criminal case.

3.

Learned State Counsel does not dispute the aforesaid facts. 4.

Having heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respective parties and taking into consideration the undisputed position of fact that the case of the petitioner would be at par with co-accused Mohd. Sameer to whom concession of regular bail has already been granted by this Court vide order dated 18.03.2026, I deem it appropriate to enlarge the petitioner on regular bail to the satisfaction of the trial Court. 5.

The instant petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing requisite bail bond/surety bond to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate, concerned. 6.

It is made clear that the petitioner shall not extend any threat and shall not influence any prosecution witnesses in any manner directly or indirectly.

7.

The observation made hereinabove shall not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case and the Trial Court shall decide the case on the basis of available material.

(VINOD S. BHARDWAJ) APRIL 24, 2026 JUDGE Vishal Sharma Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether Reportable :

Yes/No VISHAL SHARMA 2026.04.27 10:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document