Lovepreet Singh Alias Arshdeep Singh v. State Of Haryana And Another
!
"#$#%& '('
)* +,
-#%./ ,$/!
+ -#%./
'''''
# #% , ,$2$ -
,3 %
%!
% / ,
'''''
$+%!
% $ &
4) '
- - 5
- 5
'
"
#$%& '( )* +, )+)* -,.'/--0.-/--,-'+01& )+)- " !23 "
)
"
#$% 4 !
"
+ +, )+)* +* +, )+)* !!
$5!
" $4 "
4 !
6 71 6 &11 6 $4 +0 +( )+)* "
# !6 6 6 8"6 4! 97:; 4 ""
" "6 2
2 !" ! <4 "" 4 $ 4 "" * +( )+)*4"
"
4 4 ,= 4 4"
" "" >
* +( )+)*"
% +)< 71 6"!
6 4"4 ""
% '??+*<
$4 "" "
6 6 44 "4 ""
" 6 @1$ "
$ " "
% 0+*++++< !
6 !
6 @1$ 4"
"
"A ! "
>!
"
#$%4
: "
2" " B "
"
4 ! " "
B 3 " " !
" " " !
) +'
)+)0 ! !2!
4
"
"
-
C " ! ! ""
""
"
! #$% " "" ! !" #$%"
!
" " 64 !" ! !!4 !
4
)0 +- )+)044 " #$% ! " !" ! 6 4 ! "
4. Learned counsel for the State, however, has opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner. He has submitted that complicity of the petitioner has been prima facie established during the investigation conducted so far. He has submitted that during the investigation conducted so far, it has been found that out of the aforesaid amount of Rs.60,50,000/-, the amount of Rs.5,25,000/- was transferred in the bank account of one Jasbir, who during investigation disclosed that he had shared his bank account details with co-accused Anshul Thakur, in good faith. He submits that co-accused Anshul Thakur further received an amount of Rs.5,000/ as commission from the present petitioner for providing the bank account details of Jasbir to him and the petitioner received an amount of Rs.5,25,000/- in cash. He has submitted that the petitioner has a direct connection with the transactions in question in the offence committed. He has submitted that no case for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner is made out and thus, the present petition
( deserves to be dismissed.
5.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant has also opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner. He has submitted that the complainant was cheated for an amount of Rs.60,50,000/- by the petitioner. He has submitted that the petitioner has a direct connection with the transactions and the bank account of the petitioner is indulged in online fraud. He has submitted that no case for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner is made out and thus, the present petition deserves to be dismissed.
6.
The Court has heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record with their able assistance. (
$ ! " ! !" !" #$%!
" !
" 6 > % 0+*++++< % *)*+++< 4 !
4 5 4 "" "
!4 ! 4" 6 ! < ! " " 5
$ "" &"
that such like offences, i.e. cyber crimes are on rise.
,
# !
"
',).)/1
&
6 6
)+)-4
8
!"#
!# $ %
!# % $
!# & $
!# !'# ()* $ ?
"
4 " !
D!" 2
!" # $%&4" "2 "
!4 ""!
4 4" " " ""!
" ""4 '" &
+ + + $ , $ + $ - .
$ / % $ . $$ $ $ + .
/ 0 $ $ $1 1 $ $ .
!"345#'
6455$$ (3)$ ('3 & 7
$ $ +
D!" 2 '
( )* )## !) " 4 -& %
% $ $ $ (') & $ $ $ $ $ 8 $ . $ + .
4" " ! ""
&"
"
9 " 4"! "
" 4""
)
$4 "" 5 " " !
& ""! 7
:
- 5
;
'('
E 6 < F<& E !" F<&