CRM-M/27744/2026 of GAURAV Vs UT CHANDIGARH on 27 July 2026

1. This is the second petition instituted under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding to Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973) seeking the concession of regular bail in FIR No. 102 dated 22.08.2025, registered under Sections 318(4), 319(2), 336(3), 338, 340(2) and 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding to Sections 420, 419, 468, 467, 471 and 120- B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860) at Police Station Cyber Crime, Chandigarh (Annexure P-1). It is pertinent to note that the earlier bail petition was dismissed as withdrawn on 06.02.2026.

2. Briefly stated, the prosecution case originates from a complaint lodged by Gurbir Singh Deol, who alleged that on 05.02.2025, he received a telephone call from a person identifying himself as Maninder Singh Tohal, purportedly the Manager of Bajaj Allianz Insurance

-:2:- Company. The caller represented that one of the complainant's lapsed insurance policies could be reactivated upon deposit of a sum of 3,00,000 ₹ , assuring that an amount of 8,50,000 ₹ would thereafter be released in his favour within two months. Acting upon the said representation, the complainant transferred 3,00,000 ₹ through RTGS from his account maintained with the State Bank of India, Sector 34, Chandigarh, to the bank account specified by the caller. Subsequently, when the complainant's calls went unanswered, he approached the office of Bajaj Allianz Life Insurance Company at Chandigarh and discovered that he had been deceived by persons falsely impersonating officials of the company. Consequently, the present FIR came to be registered.

3. Notice of motion.

4. Upon notice, Mr. Manish Bansal, learned Public Prosecutor, accepted notice on behalf of the Union Territory, Chandigarh. The custody certificate produced by the learned Public Prosecutor is taken on record, subject to all just exceptions.

4.1. Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of regular bail, contending that having regard to the nature, gravity and seriousness of the allegations, coupled with the manner in which the offence is alleged to have been committed, the petitioner does not deserve the concession of regular bail. It is, accordingly, prayed that the present petition, being devoid of merit, be dismissed.

-:3:-

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties at length and have meticulously perused the paper book as well as the material available on record with their able assistance.

6. It is not in dispute that co-accused Sanjay Srivastava, whose role is stated to be similarly situated, has already been enlarged on regular bail by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Chandigarh, vide order dated 22.05.2026. The petitioner, therefore, is entitled to claim the benefit of parity, and no distinguishing circumstance has been pointed out by the learned Public Prosecutor so as to deny him similar relief.

6.1. It is further an admitted position that the petitioner has remained in judicial custody since 28.02.2025, having undergone incarceration for approximately one year and five months. The offences alleged are triable by a learned Magistrate. The petitioner is also entitled to the benefit of regular bail in terms of Section 480(6) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, as the learned Trial Court has failed to conclude the trial within the statutory period of sixty days from the first date fixed for recording the prosecution evidence. The continued detention of the petitioner, despite the mandate of the aforesaid statutory provision, would be wholly unjustified. Furthermore, such prolonged incarceration would infringe the petitioner's fundamental right to a speedy trial, which stands guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

6.2. The progress of the trial has remained unsatisfactory and the proceedings are not likely to attain finality in the foreseeable future.

-:4:- Consequently, no useful purpose would be served by prolonging the petitioner's incarceration pending trial.

6.3. Accordingly, 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, subject to his furnishing adequate bail and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate/Illaqa Magistrate/Duty Magistrate concerned, as the case may be, and further subject to the following conditions:- i. The petitioner(s) shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat, or promise to any person acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the case so as to dissuade such person from disclosing such facts before the Court or to the Investigating Agency. ii. The petitioner(s) shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner whatsoever, nor shall the petitioner(s), directly or indirectly, attempt to influence, intimidate, or contact any prosecution witness. iii. The petitioner(s) shall not leave the territorial limits of India without obtaining the prior permission of the learned Trial Court. In the event any of the petitioner(s) is in possession of a passport, the particulars thereof shall be furnished before the Investigating Officer as well as the learned Trial Court. iv. Before accepting the bail and surety bonds, the learned Illaqa Magistrate/Duty Magistrate/C.J.M. concerned shall obtain from the petitioner(s) the permanent residential address as well as the present correspondence address, duly supported by appropriate documentary proof. The Investigating Officer shall verify the

-:5:- correctness of the said addresses within 48 hours of the acceptance of the bail bonds and place a verification report on record. In the event any of the addresses is found to be false, fictitious, or incorrect, it shall be open to the prosecution to seek cancellation of the concession of bail in accordance with law. v. The petitioner(s) shall furnish before the learned Trial Court, either at the time of furnishing the bail bonds or within such period as may be specified by the Court, the Permanent Account Number (PAN), Aadhaar Number, particulars of all operative bank accounts, and a declaration disclosing details of immovable properties, if any. Any concealment of material particulars or furnishing of false information shall constitute a valid ground for seeking cancellation of the concession of bail in accordance with law. vi. The petitioner(s) shall intimate the Investigating Officer as well as the learned Trial Court, in writing, of any change in residential address or mobile number within seven days of such change. vii. The petitioner(s) shall not commit any offence of a similar nature during the pendency of the trial and shall remain present before the learned Trial Court on each and every date fixed, unless personal appearance is exempted in accordance with law. The petitioner(s) shall not absent from the proceedings without obtaining prior permission of the learned Trial Court. In the event of violation of any of the aforesaid conditions or unauthorized absence from the trial proceedings, it shall be open to the learned Trial Court to proceed in accordance with law, including cancellation of the concession of bail and issuance of appropriate coercive process, including warrants of arrest.

-:6:-

7. In light of the final disposition of the captioned matter, all pending miscellaneous and interconnected applications are hereby deemed disposed of. The adjudication of the primary dispute has spent the force of these ancillary proceedings, rendering them infructuous ex facie. Consequently, no independent or supplemental orders are warranted or required in respect thereof.

( VIRINDER AGGARWAL) 27.07.2026

JUDGE Gaurav Sorot Whether reasoned / speaking? Yes / No Whether reportable? Yes / No