Radhey Shayam v. State Of Haryana
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.
Sr. No.211 Case No. : CRM-M-28112-2025 Decided On : July 17, 2025 Radhey Shayam ....
Petitioner vs.
State of Haryana ....
Respondent CORAM :
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUKHVINDER KAUR.
* * * Present :
Mr. Parminder Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Karan Garg, AAG, Haryana.
* * * SUKHVINDER KAUR , J.
:
Prayer in the present petition, filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in FIR No.35 dated 02.03.2025, under Section 318(4) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, registered at Police Station Odhan, Police District Dabwali, District Sirsa. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that initially the petitioner was not named in the FIR. No amount was allegedly ever received fraudulently by him from the complainant or any other person. The QR codes, bank account and UTR transactions are not related to him. He urged that the petitioner is not required for any interrogation and no recovery is to be effected from him. He further submitted that his custodial interrogation is not required and prayed that the petitioner be granted concession of anticipatory bail.
Notice in this case was issued on 22.05.2025 for 02.07.2025, on which date Status Report was filed in the Court and was taken on record. Learned State counsel opposed the present bail petition and contended that from the mobile phone recovered from accused Vikramjit, multiple QR code scanners have been found sent from mobile number of the petitioner, which QR codes were further found to be sent to the complainant and other victims of fraud for extorting money and as such, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required for fair and proper investigation. So, he does not deserve concession of anticipatory bail. Heard.
Initially, the petitioner was not named in the FIR and his name cropped up only during investigation and as per the allegations, from the mobile phone got recovered by accused Vikramjit, multiple QR code scanners were found sent from mobile number of the petitioner, which QR codes were further found to be sent to the complainant and other victims of alleged fraud for extorting money. During investigation, no amount was found to have been deposited in the account of the petitioner. Co-accused namely Vidit Sharma, Dishant Duneja and Vikramjit have already been released on police bail. Custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required for any purpose and nothing is to be recovered from him. So, no useful purpose would be served by sending the petitioner behind the bars. Accordingly, without commenting on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed. In the event of arrest, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail, on furnishing bail/surety bonds, to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer/Investigating Officer, subject to the conditions, as
provided under Section 482(2) of BNSS. It will be open for the Investigating Officer to call the petitioner to join investigation, if so required, by issuing a written notice in this regard. The petitioner shall also abide by the conditions mentioned in Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
However, nothing observed herein above shall be construed to be an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. The observations recorded above are only for the purpose of deciding the present bail petition. July 17, 2025 (SUKHVINDER KAUR) monika JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned ?
Yes/No.
Whether reportable ?
Yes/No.