← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/31134/2025allowed

Naveen Manda v. State Of Haryana

2025-07-03Mr. Justice H.S. Grewal2 pages

CRM-M-31134-2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-31134-2025 Date of decision: 03.07.2025 Naveen Manda

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana

...Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE 

Present :

Mr. Roop Jain,, Advocate, with Mr. Prateek Sharma, Advocate, Ms. Indira Bhakar, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Parveen Aggarwal, Addl. A. G. Haryana.

**** 

 , J. (Oral) 1.

The petitioner is seeking regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in FIR No.0002 dated 01.02.2025, under Sections 318(4), 61B and 238 of BNS, 2023, registered at Cyber Police Station Mahendergarh, District Narnaul.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the case of the prosecution is that petitioner along with his co-accused was indulged in cyber fraud and duping the large amount of money of common people. The petitioner is stated to be 19 years of age and was a student of first year of CDS course. It is also stated that co-accused of the petitioner namely Ravi and Yuvaraj (Yuvi) have been granted bail by the Court. The petitioner has undergone for a period of 4 months and 14 days of custody and charges are yet to be framed and the trial is yet to commence. Learned counsel further submits that in view of the above and since the trial is likely to take some time for its own conclusion and continuous detention of the petitioner would not serve the ends of justice, petitioner be released on regular bail. ANIL KUMAR 2025.07.04 13:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M-31134-2025 3.

Notice of motion.

4.

Mr. Parveen Aggarwal, Addl. AG, Haryana, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State. Learned State counsel has filed the custody certificate in the Court today, which is taken on record. As per custody certificate dated 01.07.2025, the petitioner is in custody for 04 months and 14 days and he is not involved in any other case. 5.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

6.

In view of the above submission of learned counsel, and the fact that petitioner is in custody for the period of 04 months and 14 days as of today and charges are yet to be framed, the continuous detention of the petitioner would not serve the ends of justice. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case, this Court deems it a fit case to grant the concession of regular bail to the petitioner during the pendency of the trial. 7.

Therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant petition is allowed. The petitioner is hereby ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing requisite bail bonds, surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/Duty Magistrate/Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned.

8.

However, it is made clear that in case the petitioner misuses the concession of bail, the State would be at liberty to seek cancellation of his bail.

( ) 

 03.07.2025 anil Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes / No Whether reportable :

Yes / No ANIL KUMAR 2025.07.04 13:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document