[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Punjab-Haryana High Court
Suresh Kumar vs State Of Haryana on 23 February, 2026
CRM-M-70395-2025 (O&M) -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND
HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
147
CRM-M-70395-2025 (O&M)
Date of decision : 23.02.2026
Suresh Kumar ...Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana ...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA
Present:- Mr. Sanchit Punia, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. Neeraj Poswal, AAG, Haryana.
MANISHA BATRA, J. (Oral)
1. Prayer in this petition, filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in FIR
No. 20 dated 27.09.2024, registered under Sections 318(4), 61B and 238 of
BNS, 2023 at Cyber Police Station, Narnaul, District Mahendergarh.
2. The aforementioned FIR had been registered on the basis of a
complaint lodged by complaint Sunil Kumar, who was duped an amount of
Rs.1,18,47,353/- being subjected to cyber/online fraud. On 27.12.2024, a raid
was conducted at Flat No. 906, Sector 102, Gurugram, to apprehend Nitesh
Garg, who was the account holder of an Axis Bank account, wherein a sum of
Rs. 40,000/- from the account of co-accused Nikhil Bhardwaj had been
transferred. In the said flat, accused Mukesh Nath, Aman Dela, Pramod, Kailash
Nath, and Abhishek Sharma were found present and were involved in
committing online fraud by using mobile phones and laptops. Several mobile
phones, ATM cards, cheque books, passbooks, SIM cards and other documents
1 of 5
CRM-M-70395-2025 (O&M) -2-
were recovered and taken into possession by the police. The above-named
accused were joined in the investigation. During the course of further
investigation, the accused suffered disclosure statements admitting their
involvement in the crime. The call detail records, IMEI IDs of the cell phones
used by these accused and recovered from the spot were collected and it was
found that all of them were in conversation with each other as well as with the
petitioner. Accused Sagar @ Daggal and Ashok @ Ashu @ was arrested and
suffered disclosure statements. As per the disclosure statement of accused Sagar,
he along with one accused Kamal had opened a bank account in the name of
accused Pramod at Bandhan Bank and had handed over the said bank account
kit to co-accused Ajay Kumar @ Robin Bishnoi, who further handed over the
same to the present petitioner. He also disclosed that subsequently he started
providing bank account kits to the present petitioner and used to make calls to
the petitioner and other accused and exchanged WhatsApp chats with them.
3. As per the further allegations, the petitioner was joined in the
investigation on 23.12.2024. On his personal search, two cell phones were
recovered. Some suspicious WhatsApp chats were found in the said phones,
which were taken into custody. The petitioner suffered disclosure statements and
in his second disclosure statement suffered on 24.12.2024, he disclosed that
about one year back, after seeing an advertisement on Facebook, he had
contacted accused Arijit and Nikku, who were indulged in committing online
cyber fraud. They told the petitioner that they needed bank accounts for cyber
fraud work and, in lieu thereof, had agreed to pay Rs. 30,000 for each such
account. He joined them. He further disclosed that he had provided 120 bank
accounts to the co-accused and had also given 15 bank accounts received from
2 of 5
CRM-M-70395-2025 (O&M) -3-
accused Ashu and Ajay Kumar @ Robin and had paid money to them. He
further disclosed that he had even gone to Dubai in connection with cyber fraud
work and had stayed there for four months, thereby earning a total amount of
Rs. 6 lakhs. In pursuance of his disclosure statement, he got recovered 15 ATM
cards of different banks, seven cheque books, six passbooks, eight SIM cards,
and his passport. The video of the recovery was uploaded on e-Sakshi as per
rules. The phones recovered from the petitioner were deposited at the
CFSL/ETAC Lab, Gurugram and the report is awaited. Investigation qua the
petitioner now stands concluded.
4. It is argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner that he has
been falsely implicated in this case on the basis of disclosure statements of co-
accused, which are not admissible in evidence. He is not the beneficiary of any
transaction and no money has been transferred into any of his bank accounts.
The co-accused Aman Dela and others have been extended the benefit of bail
and on the ground of parity, he too deserves the same benefit. He is not required
for further investigation. He has been in custody for a long time. Conclusion of
trial will take considerable time. It is, therefore, argued that he deserves to be
released on bail.
5. Per contra, learned State counsel has argued that there are serious
and specific allegations against the petitioner. His complicity in the crime has
been established not only on the basis of disclosure statements of the co-accused
but also from the fact that 15 ATM cards, SIM cards, cheque books and
passbooks were recovered from his possession. The call detail records of the
petitioner and co-accused were obtained, which show that he was in direct
contact with the co-accused and used to have conversations with them. It is also
3 of 5
CRM-M-70395-2025 (O&M) -4-
submitted that as per the report of the Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre,
the cheque books and passbooks recovered from the possession of the petitioner
are linked with four cyber crime complaints registered in different States of the
country relating to online interstate fraud. It is submitted that the allegations
against the petitioner are grave in nature. The investigation is still ongoing to
trace the entire trail of the cyber crime. There are chances of the petitioner's
absconding or committing similar offences, if extended the benefit of bail. It is,
thus, argued that the petition does not deserve to be allowed.
6. This Court has heard the rival submissions.
7. The petitioner is alleged to be involved in the commission of
offences relating to online cyber fraud, as he allegedly made available bank
accounts through which defrauded money was transferred. As per the
allegations, he had provided 120 bank accounts to the co-accused. An amount of
Rs. 55,000/- is alleged to have been transferred into the bank account pertaining
to co-accused Parmod from the account of the complainant. As per the
submissions of the respondent-State, four cyber crime complaints registered in
different States of the country are found to have linkage with the cheque books
and passbooks recovered from the possession of the petitioner. The allegations
against the petitioner are serious in nature. Such cases are increasing at an
alarming rate. Every day, one comes across instances where the hard-earned
money of innocent citizens is siphoned off by organised groups of online
fraudsters. Such offences not only cause financial loss to individual victims but
also undermine public confidence in the security of digital transactions. Keeping
in view the facts and circumstances of the case, the case of the petitioner cannot
be stated to be at parity with that of the co-accused who have been extended the
4 of 5
CRM-M-70395-2025 (O&M) -5-
benefit of bail. Considering the gravity of the allegations levelled against the
petitioner, the role attributed to him and the apprehension that he may abscond
or influence the trial if extended the benefit of bail, which cannot be said to be
unfounded at this stage, this Court is of the considered opinion that the
petitioner does not deserve the concession of bail, at this stage. Accordingly, the
petition is dismissed.
8. It is clarified that the observations made above shall not be
construed as an expression of opinion of this Court on the merits of the case and
shall not influence the outcome of the trial in any manner.
23.02.2026 (MANISHA BATRA)
Waseem Ansari JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether reportable Yes/No
5 of 5
