Chaman Kumar v. State Of Haryana

-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 02.12.2025 Chaman Kumar ..... Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana ..... Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ ***

Present:

Mr. Nishant Indal, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Tanuj Sharma, AAG, Haryana.

*** RAJESH BHARDWAJ, J.

1.

Present petition has been filed praying for the grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR No.04, dated 06.01.2025, under Sections 318(4) and 319(2) BNS, 2023, registered at Police Station Cyber Crime, Ambala, District Ambala and further for setting aside the order dated 18.10.2025 whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ambala has dismissed the bail application of the petitioner mechanically on perfunctory grounds. 2.

Succinctly the facts of the case are that FIR in the present case was got registered on the statement of complainant, namely, Nikanshi, daughter of Hukam Chand. It was alleged that the complainant received a whatsapp message on her number, i.e. 9306295598 from

-2mobile number, i.e. 8240090554, with regard to work of restaurant review on Google Maps. It was alleged that the complainant earned Rs.5777/- per day by doing this work and when she completed the first task, she was given Rs.205/- as salary in her sister's SBI account bearing account No.42442445402, IFSC SBIN0016891. It was further alleged that they gave her a telegram link and the complainant clicked on the link, which led to a Telegram ID under the name of Revathi. On their request, the complainant sent her details and her sister's account details. Thereafter, she was assigned 5-6 tasks and after completing the same, Rs.150/- was sent to her sister's account. It was alleged that they asked the complainant to complete the 8th task, she will have to pay Rs.1000/-, and thus, she sent amount of Rs.

1,000/- in their account under the guise of completing task. Thereafter they sent a link and asked her to register and send screen shot. It was alleged that the complainant was asked for payments time and again, and thus, she deposited different amounts in their different accounts for earning more profits. It was alleged that they asked the complainant to pay Rs.2,00,000/- for completing the task, failing which, your money will not be returned. Thereafter, despite the repeated callas, her money was not returned. The complainant realized that she has been cheated for an amount of Rs.6,50,000/- and thus, the complaint was lodged. On the basis of the complaint, the present FIR has been registered and the investigation commenced.

During the investigation, complicity of the petitioner surfaced and thus, he was arrayed as an accused in the present case.

-3arrested on 09.09.2025. On completion of investigation, the challan was presented. The petitioner approached the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ambala praying for the grant of regular bail. However, after hearing both the sides and finding no merit in the same, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ambala declined the bail application filed by the petitioner vide order dated 18.10.2025. Hence, being aggrieved, the petitioner is before this Court by way of filing the present petition praying for the grant of regular bail.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently contended that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has submitted that neither the petitioner is named in the FIR nor any overt act has been alleged against him. He has submitted that however during the investigation, the petitioner has been arrayed as an accused in the present case only on the allegation that a sum of Rs.60,000/- was transferred into his bank account on the request of the co-accused, which the petitioner has handed over to him. He has submitted that the petitioner is behind bars since the date of his arrest, i.e. 09.09.2025. He has submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedents as he has never been involved in any other case and the material witnesses already stand examined.

He has submitted that the petitioner is the only breadwinner for his family, who has two minor children. He has submitted that no notice or intimation under Sections 35 & 41-A of BNSS was ever issued to the petitioner at any point of time. He has submitted that in the facts and circumstances, the petitioner deserves to be granted bail.

-44.

Per contra, learned counsel for the State has vehemently opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner. She has submitted that during the investigation, complicity of the petitioner is prima facie established. She has submitted that there are two accused in the present FIR and the petitioner along with the co-accused has allegedly cheated the complainant for an amount of Rs.6,50,000/-. She has further submitted that the investigation qua him is pending. She has further submitted that the trial is at the initial stage and thus, in the facts and circumstances, no case for the grant of regular bail to the petitioner is made out and the present petition deserves to be dismissed. She has produced custody certificate of the petitioner today in the Court which is taken on record.

5.

The Court has heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record with their able assistance. 6.

On hearing counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is deciphered that the petitioner has been arrayed as an accused during the investigation. Specific role has been attributed to the petitioner and an amount of Rs.60,00/- has been transferred in his account. It is a case of cyber fraud and the petitioner along with the co-accused has cheated the complainant for an amount of Rs.6,50,000/- and investigation is in progress. The petitioner is behind bars since 09.09.2025. Custody certificate produced would show that the petitioner has suffered incarceration of 02 months and 23 days as on 01.12.2025, however the

-5investigtion is at threshold. Cases of similar nature, i.e cyber crime are on rise.

7.

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court does not find any ground to grant regular bail to the petitioner and hence, the present petition is hereby dismissed. Nothing said herein shall be treated as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. (RAJESH BHARDWAJ) 02.12.2025 JUDGE rittu Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No