[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Punjab-Haryana High Court
Afzal Ali vs State Of Haryana on 19 January, 2026
Prayer in the present petition filed under Section 483 BNSS
is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.
No.194 dated
03.08.2025, registered under Sections 318(4) and 61(2) of BNS, at Police
Station Cyber Crime, NIT, Faridabad.
2. Learned counsel contends that the petitioner has been in
custody for 5 months. He alleges false implication. The allegation against
him is of having provided bank account number of co
co-accused Manoj to
other co-accused
accused Kunal. Challan has been presented on 14.10.2025,
however, charges are yet to be framed and there are, in all, 8 PWs. The
petitioner is involved in 2 more cases wherein he is on bail. Reliance is
placed on the judgment passed by Hon'ble The Supreme Court titled aas
PARVEEN KUMAR
2026.01.19 19:05
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this
order/judgment.
Maulana Mohd. Amir Rashadi vs. State of U.P. and others, 2012(2)
SCC 382.
3. The custody certificate dated 18.01.2026, filed by the learned
State counsel is taken on record. As per the same, the petitioner is behind
bars for 5 months.
4. Learned State counsel opposes the bail on the ground that
there are specific allegations against the petitioner of having provided the
account number of co-accused to other co-accused, who are involve in
cyber fraud. However, he is unable to controvert the submissions with
regard to stage of the case.
5. Heard.
6. Hon'ble The Supreme Court in the case of Maulana Mohd.
Amir Rashadi (Supra)had held that, "As observed by the High Court,
merely on the basis of criminal antecedents, the claim of the second
respondent cannot be rejected. In other words, it is the duty of the Court to
find out the role of the accused in the case in which he has been charged
and other circumstances such as possibility of fleeing away from the
jurisdiction of the Court, etc." Reiterating in Prabhakar Tewari vs. State
of UP and another, (2020) 11 SCC 648, it was observed that, "The
offence alleged no doubt is grave and serious and there are several
criminal cases pending against the accused. These factors by themselves
cannot be the basis for refusal of prayer for bail."
7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, in
particular that the petitioner is in custody for the last 5 months; challan
stands presented on 14.10.2025, but charges have not been framed and
there are total 8 PWs; the trial is likely to take a considerable time and
further incarceration of the petitioner would be violative of his right
enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the present
petition is allowed.
8. The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail,
subject to furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of trial
Court/Duty Magistrate concerned, if not required in any other case and
shall abide by the following conditions:-
(i) The petitioner will not tamper with the evidence
during the trial.
(ii) The petitioner will not pressurize/ intimidate the
prosecution witnesses.
(iii) The petitioner will appear before the trial Court
on each and every date fixed, unless is exempted
by a specific order of Court.
(iv) The petitioner shall not commit an offence
similar to the offence of which, he is an accused,
or for commission of which he is suspected of.
(v) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly
coerce, induce, threaten or promise to any
person acquainted with the facts of the case so
as to dissuade him/ her from disclosing such
facts to the Court or to any police officer or
tamper with the evidence in any manner.
(vi) The petitioner shall not in any manner misuse
his liberty.
(vii) The petitioner shall furnish his address and
mobile number by way of an affidavit to the trial
Court and not change the same till conclusion of
trial and if for any reasons, he seeks to change
either of the aforesaid, it shall be done only with
prior information to the learned trial Court.
(viii) The petitioner shall not leave the country
without prior permission of the trial Court.
(ix) The trial Court/Duty Magistrate may impose
any other condition, as deemed appropriate
while releasing the petitioner.
9. It is made abundantly clear that in case there is any breach of
the aforesaid conditions, the State shall be at liberty to seek cancellation
of bail as granted to the petitioner by this order.
10. In view of the above, it is clarified that the observations
made herein above are limited for the purpose of present proceedings and
would not be construed as any opinion on the merits of the case and the
trial would proceed independently of the aforesaid observations.
