Raj Mahendrabhai Chauhan v. State Of Haryana

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-33644-2026 Date of decision:30.06.2026 RAJ MAHENDRABHAI CHAUHAN ...PETITIONER

VERSUS

STATE OF HARYANA ...RESPONDENT CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PARMOD GOYAL

Present:

Mr. Manish Soni, Advocate for petitioner.

Mr. Varun Gupta, DAG, Haryana.

Mr. Hitesh Chauhan, Advocate for complainant.

*** PARMOD GOYAL, J. (ORAL) Present petition has been filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (Section 439 of Cr.P.C.) by petitioner for grant of concession of regular bail in FIR No.33 dated 25.07.2024 (Annexure P-1) registered under Sections 420, 120B of Indian Penal Code [corresponding to Sections 318(4) and 61(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita] at Police Station Cyber Crime, District Rewari.

2.

Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner neither induced the complainant to invest money nor was beneficiary of money allegedly paid by complainant. It is further submitted that no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner in jail as challan has already been filed and trial is likely to take time.

3.

It is further submitted that matter stands compromised between the petitioner and the complainant and the complainant has no objection if SUNIL CHANDER 2026.06.30 12:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M-33644-2026 -2petitioner is granted bail. Mr. Hitesh Chauhan, Advocate appears on behalf of complainant and admits the submissions advanced by learned counsel for petitioner.

4.

Learned counsel for State has opposed the bail application of petitioner on the ground that petitioner is the person who had provided accounts details of co-accused and got the commission for the same from the main accused who is still absconding. It is further submitted that petitioner is involved in similar nature of crime wherein a complaint on the similar facts is pending against the petitioner.

5.

On consideration of respective contentions raised by both the parties, I find that no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner in jail as the challan has already been filed, investigation against the petitioner has concluded as well as while keeping in view the role of petitioner against whom it is alleged that he has provided account details of co-accused facilitating the bank transaction after getting the commission. 6.

In view of above, let petitioner be released on bail on furnishing of bail bonds to the satisfaction of trial Court/Duty Magistrate/Chief Judicial Magistrate.

7.

Present petition be disposed of in above terms. (PARMOD GOYAL) JUDGE 30.06.2026 Sunil Chander Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No SUNIL CHANDER 2026.06.30 12:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document