Punjab-Haryana High Court
Anil Singh @ Guddu vs State Of Haryana on 26 April, 2023
2023:PHHC:059174
211
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Cri. Misc. No. M-11555 of 2023
Date of Decision: April 26, 2023
Anil Singh @ Guddu
desees Petitioner
versus
State of Haryana
seve Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SUDHIR MITTAL
kK
Present: Mr. Pankaj Bali, Advocate
for the petitioner
Mr. Himmat Singh, DAG Haryana
36 2 2
Sudhir Mittal, J. (Oral)
The petitioner seeks grant of regular bail in case FIR No. 2 dated
01.08.2022, registered at Police Station Cyber Crime, Sector 23, Sonipat under
Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC and Sections 66-C and 66-D of IT Act.
Status report dated 21.04.2023 has been filed in the Court. The same
is taken on record. A copy of the same has been supplied to learned counsel for the
petitioner.
Based thereupon, learned State counsel has submitted that
involvement of the petitioner in this case is clear. There is unimpeachable
evidence by way of hotel bills and CCTV footage. A sum of Rs. 1.14 lacs has also
been deposited in the account of the petitioner and evidence of the same is
available in the shape of bank statement. A total sum of Rs. 1.99 crores has been
withdrawn from various accounts of the complainant and have been transferred to
different banks in the country from where the same has been withdrawn on the next
BOBS OM. 26 1 .
iaterto wedauciteelf by different teams.
Chandigarh
REENA
2023:PHHC:059174
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that there is no other
criminal case pending against the petitioner. He has been in custody for more than
seven months and the trial is not likely to be concluded at an early date as
examination of PWs has not commenced. Sahil Sanjiv Poddar is the kingpin of
the ring of which the petitioner is a minor member. Thus, he deserves the
concession of regular bail.
Custody certificate dated 25.04.2023 digitally signed by
Sh. Shailakshi Bhardwaj, Deputy Superintendent, District Prison, Karnal has been
filed in Court. The same is taken on record. A perusal thereof shows that the
petitioner has undergone actual custody of 07 months and 14 days and there is no
other criminal case pending/decided against him.
Learned State counsel concedes that examination of PWs has not yet
commenced. He, however, justifies the same by stating that only 13 out of a total
of 50 accused have been arrested as yet.
Keeping in view the nature of the allegations made as well as the fact
that the involvement of the petitioner in the crime appears to be apparent, he does
not deserve the concession of regular bail.
The petition is, accordingly, dismissed.
Nothing stated hereinabove shall be construed to be an opinion on the
merits of the case.
April 26, 2023 [SUDHIR MITTAL]
reena JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether Reportable : Yes/No
2023.04.26 15:47
| attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this order/ judgment
Chandigarh
