Sagar v. State Of Haryana

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH DECIDED ON: 22.01.2026 SAGAR .....PETITIONER

VERSUS

STATE OF HARYANA .....RESPONDENT

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH.

Present:

Mr. Rajesh Kumar Kashyap, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. Kanwar Sanjiv Kumar, AAG, Haryana.

SANJAY VASHISTH , J (ORAL) 1.

By recording certain facts, on 27.11.2025 following order was passed by this Court:- "1.

Prayer in this petition, filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 438 Cr.P.C.), is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, who has been booked in a criminal case arising out of First Information Report, as detailed hereunder:- Name & age of Petitioner FIR No.

Date Section(s) Police Station District (s) Sagar, aged about 21 years 08.08.2025 316(2) of BNS Ladwa Kurukshetra 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, submits that as per the allegations, complainantKaran Kumar was employed at Rakesh Garments, Sangam Market, Ladwa, where he came into contact with the petitioner Sagar, who was then unemployed. Over a period of acquaintance, petitioner also secured employment alongside the complainant at Raju Garments. It is alleged that, having gained the complainant's confidence, petitioner persuaded him to

-2open a bank account bearing No.08871000016814 with Punjab and Sind Bank, Ladwa, and petitioner linked his own mobile number, 96529-44743, with the said account. Complainant later suspected misuse of the bank account by the petitioner and consequently lodged an online complaint on 22.07.2025, alleging fraud and criminal conspiracy. Upon realising the alleged fraud, complainant deactivated the earlier mobile number linked with the account and replaced it with 89502-28492.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the mobile number which was earlier linked to the bank account, never belonged to the petitioner, and therefore, no offence has been committed by him. It is submitted that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present criminal proceedings. Thus, counsel prays for grant of concession of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in the present case.

4.

Notice of motion.

On advance notice, Mr. Kanwar Sanjiv Kumar, learned AAG, Haryana, appears on behalf of the respondent-State and submits that the bank account in question was intentionally opened by the petitioner in the name of the complainant, and petitioner subsequently misused the said account. It is further submitted that the funds fraudulently collected from other investors were deposited into this account, and were thereafter withdrawn by the petitioner to the extent of Rs.9,88,000/-. However, learned State counsel seeks some time to file status report in the matter.

6.

Adjourned to 13.01.2026.

7.

To be shown in the urgent list.

8.

Let status report be filed by learned State counsel clarifying therein:- (i) when the petitioner first came into contact with the complainant;

(ii) the date on which the bank account was opened;

(iii) the total amount credited into the said account; and (iv) the manner in which the amount, as stated by learned State counsel, was withdrawn by the accused person(s)."

-32.

Learned State counsel has filed status report dated 12.01.2026, which is already there on the record. 3.

Paragraph Nos.4, 5, 6 and 7 of the status report are reproduced here under:- "4.

That CCTV footage taken in police possession was shown to the complainant Karan Kumar and he clearly identified the person who was his companion at the time of opening bank account in Punjab and Sindh bank Ladwa as a Sagar accused. The supplementary statement of complainant was recorded on 19.08.2025 in this regard and complainant Karan Kumar stated that I have seen the pen drive through laptop and the boy with me in the bank on 06.06.2025 is accused Sagar who hold the bank account kit. The accused Sagar told him that the said bank account number was sold him to another person in lieu of commission. The copy of bank account Statement wef. 10.06.2025 to 28.06.2025, Photgraph of CCTV footage extracted from Pen Drive of dated 06.06.2025 and Supplementary statement of complainant dated 19.08.

2025 are enclosed as Annexure- R-1, R-2 and R-3 respectively. As per bank account statement total amount of Rs.7,49,411/- was credited out of which Rs.7,48,763/- was debited and copy of which is enclosed as AnnexureR-4. That the accused went with the complainant to the Punjab and Sindh Bank Ladwa and the same is clearly reflected in CCTV footage. The photograph showing the presence of accused in the bank with complainant for opening the bank account. The Photograph of the same is as Annexure-R-2.

6.

That for joining the investigation, the whereabouts of accused Sagar was enquired and found that he has been arrested by Delhi police on dated 18.08.2025 and was released on bail from Tihar Jail Delhi, till then he didn't appear before police despite notice.

7.

That apart from the above one more case FIR no.16 dated 30.07.2025 u/s 318(4),319 BNS, Cyber Police Station south-west Delhi is also pending against the petitioner in which he has been bailed out. That one more Cyber complaint relating to the same account no.08871000016814 used by petitioner is also pending in PS Shyam Nagar, Jaipur, Rajasthan. Accordingly, anticipatory bail filed by the accused Sagar before ASJ Kurukshetra was rightly dismissed vide order dated 19.11.2025. Hence the present bail application is liable to be dismissed."

-44.

Allegations levelled by the complainant, Karan Kumar, prima facie appear to be substantiated in view of the status report. It has been clearly stated therein that, as per the CCTV footage and photographs, petitioner was present in the bank on the date when the complainant's account was opened.

Furthermore, petitioner is also found to be involved in another case of a similar nature, registered in Delhi as FIR No.16 dated 30.07.2025 under Sections 318(4) and 319 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, at Cyber Police Station, South-West Delhi. In view of the prima facie confirmation of the allegations, this Court does not find any substantial ground to extend the concession of discretionary relief to the petitioner. Accordingly, present petition stands dismissed.

(SANJAY VASHISTH) 22.01.2026 JUDGE Lavisha Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No