Punjab-Haryana High Court
Arun Sharma vs State Of Haryana on 24 April, 2024
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:055473
CRM-M-18219-2024 --1--
2024:PHHC:055473
101 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-18219-2024
Decided on:-24.04.2024
Arun Sharma ....Petitioner..
vs.
State of Haryana ....Respondent.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA
Present: Mr. Kamal Chaudhary, Advocate,
for the petitioner.
Mr. Chetan Sharma, DAG, Haryana.
*****
HARKESH MANUJA J. (Oral)
1. By way of present petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C.,
prayer has been made for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case
FIR No.23 dated 21.02.2024, registered under Section 420 IPC (Section
120-B IPC added later on), at Police Station Cyber Crime Central Faridabad,
District Faridabad, wherein, the petitioner has been implicated for having
duped the complainant for a sum of Rs.1,34,328/- by way of an online
banking fraud.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no direct
evidence connecting the petitioner with the alleged offence and the main
accused, namely, Gaurav Chauhan has already refunded the amount
defrauded by him, to the complainant and a statement to this effect has also
been given by the complainant in his favour, which finds mention in the
order dated 05.04.2024 passed by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class,
Faridabad while granting regular bail to him.
1 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:055473
CRM-M-18219-2024 --2--
2.1 Learned counsel also submits that the entire story put forth by the
prosecution agency about the petitioner having utilized the amount for
placing an order for gold chain on the day/date of fraud and having received
the same as depicted from the CCTV footage is a made-up story and thus,
the petitioner being not connected with the offence in hand deserves the
concession of anticipatory bail.
3. On the other hand, learned State counsel vehemently opposes the
prayer made on behalf of the petitioner while submitting that the petitioner is
directly connected with the offence in hand, as a CCTV footage from the
showroom of Blue Stone Jewellers, Faridabad has been obtained by the
Investigating Agency, wherein, the petitioner is clearly visible while
receiving the gold chain from the salesman while standing across the
counter.
3.1 Learned State counsel also submits that a sum of Rs.1,34,328/-
qua which the complainant was duped of by the petitioner with the aid of
co-accused (Gaurav Chauhan) was directly transferred to the account of
Blue Stone Jewellers, Faridabad. He further points out that all these
transactions were made with the help of three different mobile numbers
(i.e. 8130418758, 7017489341, 7906538189) being used by the petitioner.
He further points out that regarding the latter two mobile numbers (i.e.
7017489341, 7906538189), on verification, it was found that the sims were
obtained by the petitioner in a fraudulent manner by misusing the documents
of other individuals. He also submits that at the time of purchase of gold
chain even the address given by the petitioner was of Police Colony, New
Delhi rather than his own address of Village Basi, Bhagpat Uttar Pradesh,
which further fortifies his intent to commit fraud and further to escape
2 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:055473
CRM-M-18219-2024 --3--
thereafter from the clutches of the Investigating Agency and thus, he does
not deserve the discretionary relief of anticipatory bail in the larger public
interest.
4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the
paper book.
5. A cumulative analysis of the facts and circumstances of the case
made out from the records as well as the submissions made on behalf of the
parties, I am unable to find substance in the submissions made on behalf of
the petitioner.
6. Generally, in cases of online banking frauds, there is no direct
evidence available to connect the accused with the offence and it is only the
Investigating Agency which through its efforts, involving scientific
assistance provided through their expert teams of Cyber Crime is able to
connect the dots and reach the perpetrators while locating and connecting
them through their mobile numbers, mobile tower locations, CCTV
footage/Sim mapping/email-IDs and their banking transactions.
7. In the present case as well, admittedly, the amount of
Rs.1,34,328/-, defrauded by the petitioner from the account of the
complainant was directly transferred to the account of Blue Stone Jewellers,
Faridabad against purchase of a gold chain, which was received by the
petitioner as recorded in the CCTV footage of the relevant date and time as
made available to the investigating team. Furthermore, out of the three
mobile numbers, which were used in the transactions of duping the
complainant, two mobile numbers were found to be obtained by the
petitioner against the documents of third party individuals by misusing those
besides even having provided his fake address to the Blue Stone Jewellers,
3 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:055473
CRM-M-18219-2024 --4--
Faridabad at the time of purchasing/receiving the gold chain which reflects
the dishonest intent and prima facie connects the petitioner with the offence
in hand. Mere fact that one of the co-accused, namely, Gaurav Chauhan has
reimbursed the defrauded amount and has been granted the concession of
regular bail, no where entitles the petitioner for grant of discretionary relief
of anticipatory bail in the given facts and circumstances. Reference in this
regard can also be made to a decision rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court
in case of "Srikant Upadhyay & others vs. State of Bihar and another"
reported as 2024 INSC 202. Relevant paragraph No.8 of the said judgment is
reproduced hereunder:-
"It is thus obvious from the catena of decisions dealing
with bail that even while clarifying that arrest should be the last
option and it should be restricted to cases where arrest is
imperative in the facts and circumstances of a case, the consistent
view is that the grant of anticipatory bail shall be restricted to
exceptional circumstances. In other words, the position is that the
power to grant anticipatory bail under Section 438, Cr. PC is an
exceptional power and should be exercised only in exceptional
cases and not as a matter of course. Its object is to ensure that a
person should not be harassed or humiliated in order to satisfy the
grudge or personal vendetta of the complainant. (See the decision
of this Court in HDFC Bank Ltd. v. J.J.Mannan & Anr.)"
8. Moreover, such kind of online frauds through cyber crime are
increasing day-by-day wherein innocent individuals are being deceived in
order to extract undue financial gains which are potentially affecting their
financial, economical and social stability. These incidents are even
diminishing the general public trust in the online/digital banking transactions
and may lead to uncalled for hesitation to engage in e-commerce or digital
4 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:055473
CRM-M-18219-2024 --5--
services, thereby, creating doubt upon the entire banking system and its
efficacy, resulting into huge economical loss to the Nation at large.
Moreover, such kind of fraud through economic transactions is definitely
going to result in long term economical as well as emotional distress to the
victims and may also encourage the dishonest intents of such perpetrators. In
such circumstances, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is essential
in the interest of public at large so as to unearth the modus operandi adopted
by him in online fraud/cyber crime which definitely and essentially resulted
in breach of privacy of the complainant.
9. Resultantly, the present petition is thus, dismissed being devoid of
merits.
24.04.2024 (HARKESH MANUJA)
sonika JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
Whether reportable: Yes/ No
5 of 5
