Suresh Kumar v. State Of Haryana And Another

-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision:28.11.2025 Suresh Kumar ... Petitioner Vs.

State of Haryana & another ... Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA

Present:

Mr. John Kumar, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Neeraj Poswal, AAG, Haryana.

...

Manisha Batra, J. (Oral).

The instant petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking grant of regular bail in case arising out of FIR No.19, dated 20.01.2025, registered under Section 318(4) of the BNS (Offences under Sections 61(2) and 238 of the BNS were added lateron) at Police Station Cyber Crime, NIT Faridabad, District Faridabad.

2.

The aforementioned FIR was registered on the basis of written complaint submitted by the complainant - Ritika Sharma alleging that on 19.12.2024, she had received a whatsApp message from a phone number, whereby a job to review websites on Google had been offered to her. She had agreed to the same. She had been presented a sample task on whatsApp and then was linked with the Telegram App. She had been generated task as per the instructions and was joined in the group on Telegram. Initially, she

-2was provided tasks like trading and then was induced to invest money to buy stocks and earn profits. Profits were displayed in the portal as given by the sponsors of the above mentioned task. She was made to deposit Rs.5,95,100/- and Rs.14,24,500/- from her two different bank accounts. Lateron when she tried to withdraw the same, she realized that she had been duped of that amount and fraud and cheating had been committed with her. After registration of the FIR on the basis of this complaint, investigation proceedings were initiated.

3.

During the course of investigation, it was revealed that the money withdrawn from the bank accounts of the complainant had been transferred to different accounts in different banks and an amount of Rs.2 lakhs had been transferred in the bank account operated by the present petitioner. Petitioner was arrested on 20.07.2025. He was interrogated and suffered disclosure statement admitting his involvement in the crime and also disclosed names of co-accused Charan Singh and Pinku. Investigation now stands completed and even challan has been presented. 4.

It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that he has been falsely implicated in this case. Infact he had been induced by his employer, namely, Charan Singh to open the concerned bank account in his name. Account had been operated by his employer. He is not beneficiary of any transaction. He is in custody since long. Trial will take considerable time to conclude. He has clean antecedents. His further incarceration would not serve any useful purpose. It is, therefore, urged that the petition deserves to be allowed.

5.

Status report has been filed.

-36.

Learned State counsel has argued that there are serious allegations against the petitioner as he by hatching a conspiracy with the coaccused, had induced the complainant to invest the amount of Rs.20,19,600/- on the pretext to buy stocks and earn profits. An amount of Rs.2 lakhs had been transferred from the bank account of the complainant to his account which has been usurped by him. There are chances of his absconding or committing similar offences, if extended benefit of bail. Therefore, it is argued that the petition does not deserve to be allowed. 7.

This Court has heard rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties at considerable length. 8.

The petitioner along with co-accused is alleged to have cheated the complainant by inducing her to part with money to the tune of Rs.20,19,600/-. He is in custody since 20.07.2025. The investigation qua him stands completed. Trial will obviously take considerable time to conclude since no prosecution witness has been examined so far. Taking into consideration the period spent by the petitioner in custody, the attendant facts and circumstances, but without meaning to make any comment on the merits of the case, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petition deserves to be allowed. Accordingly, the same is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his furnishing personal as well as surety bonds with two sureties in the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Court concerned/Duty Magistrate and subject to the condition that he shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case. He shall appear before the learned trial Court on each and every date of hearing except when his

-4presence has been exempted by the trial Court. He shall furnish details of his cell phone and Aadhaar card, and shall keep his cell phone switched on during the pendency of the trial. He shall surrender his passport and shall not leave the country without the leave of the trial Court. 9.

Since the main petition has been allowed, pending application, if any, is rendered infructuous.

(MANISHA BATRA) 28.11.2025 JUDGE harjeet Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No