Amit Kumar Kharara v. State Of Haryana

In the High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana At Chandigarh Date of Decision:- 10.11.2025 Amit Kumar Khurara ... Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana ... Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHAS MEHLA Present:- Mr. Kamal Chaudhary, Advocate for the petitioner. ***** SUBHAS MEHLA , J. (Oral) 1.

By way of the present petition, the petitioner is seeking regular bail in FIR No.126 dated 13.05.2025 under Sections 318(4), 61(2) BNS and Section 66-D of IT Act registered at Police Station Cyber Manesar, Gurugram Haryana.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 07.08.2025 and he was a victim of Cyber fraud by co-accused, namely, Suraj Dhakad, who used his account after alluring him to provide some government scheme. Later on, only Rs.2,000/- was given to him and the kit was taken by Suraj Dhakad and all transactions have been done by coaccused. After the arrest, nothing has been recovered from the possession of the present petitioner; he is having clear antecedents and is not involved in any other criminal activity; he is a poor labourer and work as a Safai Karamchari and investigation qua him has already been completed, thus, the petitioner deserves to be relearsed on regular bail. 3.

Notice of motion.

( 2 ) 4.

Mr. Karan Veer Singh, Sr. DAG, Haryana, puts in appearance as advance copy of petition had been served to respondent-State and opposed the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner by submitting that the present petitioner alongwith co-accused was involved in cyber fraud and complainant was cheated to the tune of Rs.10,86,000/-. It is not disputed that after arrest of the petitioner, nothing has been recovered from his possession and he is not involved in any other criminal activity except the present one. 4.

Heard.

5.

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case; the petitioner is in custody for a period of 2 months; investigation qua him has already been completed; there is no material to suggest that he is involved in any other criminal case except the present one; as per contention of learned counsel for the petitioner that his account was used by co-accused on the pretext of providing some government scheme; nothing has been recovered from the petitioner after his arrest; trial will take sufficient time to conclude and no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping him in custody for any further period, as concession of bail cannot be denied just as a measure of punishment, this Court deems it a fit case to grant the concession of regular bail to the petitioner.

6.

Therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing requisite bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate/Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned. 7.

Nothing observed hereinabove shall be construed to be expression of an opinion by this Court on merits of the case. The learned

( 3 ) Court below is directed to proceed with the matter on its own merits, lest it may prejudice the trial.

( SUBHAS MEHLA ) 10.11.2025 JUDGE Geeta Whether speaking /reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No