Punjab and Haryana High Court
CRM-M/20333/2026 of ANKIT Vs STATE OF HARYANA on 27 July 2026
take a sufficiently long time to conclude and, therefore, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner in custody any longer. 5. Per contra, learned State counsel has opposed the bail application stating that the allegations are very serious and in case the petitioner is granted
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
Chandigarh
will take a sufficiently long time to conclude and, therefore, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner in custody any longer.
5. Per contra, learned State counsel has opposed the bail application stating that the allegations are very serious and in case the petitioner is granted bail, he may try to threaten the witnesses and may also abscond.
6. I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties.
7. No doubt, the allegations are serious. Such crimes are on the
Chandigarh rise. The complainant transferred a sum of Rs.1.94 Crores on the asking of some lady who is stated to have become his friend on Facebook. One Satish is stated to be the mastermind who used to take bank kits from different people for transfer of the amount/s. The said Satish is in custody. In so far as the petitioner is concerned, he is stated to be the Director of an NGO Sachibhawana Foundation in which a sum of Rs.25 Lakhs was transferred. The allegation is that the petitioner had taken a sum of Rs.30,000/- for providing the bank account kit for online transfer of the amount. His antecedents are clean. He is in custody since the time of his arrest on 15.10.2025. 09 months and 09 days have elapsed. Investigation stands completed; final report has been submitted; charges have been framed on 17.02.2026 but no witness has yet been examined.
8. Keeping in view the totality of the facts and circumstances, this Court is of the considered opinion that no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner in custody any longer.
9. In view of the aforementioned facts and circumstances, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate concerned. Rekha
Chandigarh