Sukha Ram vs Ut Of Chandigarh

Sukha Ram ....Petitioner Petitioner versus State of U.T., Chandigarh ....Respondent

Date of decision: January 20, 20, 2026 Date of Uploading: January 20, 20, 2026

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL

Present:- Present: Mr. Pawan Attri, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Manish Bansal, Public Prosecutor, U.T., Chandigarh with Mr. Dixit Bhardwaj, Advocate for the respondent.

***** SUMEET GOEL, GOEL, J. (ORAL)

Present petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya

Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNSS') for grant of regular bail to

the petitioner, petitioner in case FIR No.107 dated 27.10.2024 27.10.2024, for the offence punishable

under Sections Section 319(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3),, 340(2) and 61(2) of the BNS, 2023 2023,,

registered at Police Station Cyber Crime, District Chandigarh.

2. The gravamen of allegations against the petitioner is that the

complainant, namely, Ms. Pooja Verma, alleged that she was cheated of

27,000 through a fraudulent phone call and consequent bank transaction. ₹27,000

During the course of investigation, it was revealed that the said amount was

transferred to a bank account linked to a larger cyber fraud network. The

petitioner voluntarily surrendered before the Court and was thereafter arrested

on 28.03.2025. During interrogation, it was disclosed that the complainant was

1 of 4 ::: Downloaded on - 21-01-2026 11:41:52 ::: 2

CRM-

CRM-M-48439- 48439-2025

initially defrauded through a bank account belonging to the petitioner. It further

emerged that the petitioner had handed over his bank account details, along

with the ATM card and passbooks, to the co-accused persons for a monetary

consideration, thereby facilitating the commission of cyber frauds, including

OLX scams, investment frauds, and loan application traps.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner is

in custody since 28.03.2025. Learned counsel has further argued that the

petitioner has been falsely implicated into the FIR in question. Learned counsel

has iterated that, in fact, it is the petitioner himself who has been duped as his

bank account has been used as a mule account. Learned counsel has further

iterated that, in any case, investigation qua FIR in question is complete and

culmination of trial will take long time. Learned counsel has further iterated

that the petitioner is a man with clean antecedents. Thus, regular bail is prayed

for.

4. Learned counsel for the U.T., Chandigarh has vehemently

opposed the present petition by arguing that the allegations raised against the

petitioner are direct/ serious in nature and, thus, the petitioner does not deserve

the concession of the regular bail. Learned counsel seeks to place on record

custody certificate dated 07.12.2025, in the Court today, which is taken on

record.

5. I have heard counsel for the parties and have gone through the

available records of the case.

6. The petitioner was arrested on 28.03.2025 whereinafter

investigation was carried out and the challan has been presented on 28.04.2025.

It is not in dispute before this Court that total 16 prosecution witnesses have

2 of 4 ::: Downloaded on - 21-01-2026 11:41:53 ::: 3

CRM-

CRM-M-48439- 48439-2025

been cited, out of which, none has been examined till date. It is thus,

indubitable, that conclusion of the trial will take long time. The rival contention

raised at Bar give rise to debatable issues, which shall be ratiocinated upon

during the course of trial. This Court does not deem it appropriate to delve deep

into these rival contentions, at this stage, lest it may prejudice the trial. Nothing

tangible has been brought forward to indicate the likelihood of the petitioner

absconding from the process of justice or interfering with the prosecution

evidence.

6.1. As per custody certificate dated 07.12.2025 filed by learned

counsel for the U.T., Chandigarh, the petitioner has already suffered

incarceration for a period of 08 months and 10 days, & is not shown to be

involved in any other FIR(s).

Suffice to say, further detention of the petitioner as an undertrial is

not warranted in the facts and circumstances of the case.

7. In view of above, the present petition is allowed. Petitioner is

ordered to be released on regular bail, if not required in any other case, on his

furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Ld. concerned CJM/Duty

Magistrate. However, in addition to conditions that may be imposed by the

concerned CJM/Duty Magistrate, the petitioner shall remain bound by the

following conditions:

(i) The petitioner shall not mis-use the liberty granted.

(ii) The petitioner shall not tamper with any evidence, oral or documentary, during the trial.

(iii) The petitioner shall not absent himself on any date before the trial.

(iv) The petitioner shall not commit any offence while on bail.

(v) The petitioner shall deposit his passport, if any, with the trial Court.

(vi) The petitioner shall give his cell-phone number to the Investigating Officer/SHO of concerned Police Station and

3 of 4 ::: Downloaded on - 21-01-2026 11:41:53 ::: 4

CRM-

CRM-M-48439- 48439-2025

shall not change his cell-phone number without prior permission of the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate.

(vii) The petitioner shall not in any manner try to delay the trial.

8. In case of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions and those

which may be imposed by concerned CJM/Duty Magistrate as directed

hereinabove or upon showing any other sufficient cause, the State/complainant

shall be at liberty to move cancellation of bail of the petitioner.

9. Ordered accordingly.

10. Nothing said hereinabove shall be construed as an expression of

opinion on the merits of the case.

11. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.

(SUMEET GOEL) GOEL) JUDGE January 20, 20, 2026 mahavir

Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No

Whether reportable: Yes/No

4 of 4 ::: Downloaded on - 21-01-2026 11:41:53 :::