CRM-M/36440/2026 of SUMIT TEJI Vs STATE OF PUNJAB on 14 July 2026

1. This petition has been filed for grant of regular bail under Section 483 of BNSS (erstwhile Section 439 Cr.P.C) in case FIR No. 06 dated 20.02.2026 under Sections 318(4), 61(2) of the BNS, 2023 (Sections 420,120- B IPC, 1860) and Section 66 of Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008 registered at Police Station Cyber Crime Police Station, SAS Nagar, District SAS Nagar.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the FIR was registered on the statement of the complainant, who alleged that he was added to a WhatsApp group, namely "SBI Security", by certain unknown persons. It is alleged that the said persons induced him to invest money in the share market on the false assurance of earning substantial returns. Believing their representations, the complainant invested various amounts, thereby falling victim to the alleged fraud. During the course of investigation, it surfaced that a sum of ₹10,19,712/- was transferred from the complainant's bank account to the bank account of co-accused Lekhraj Pawar. Thereafter, an amount of ₹8,00,000/- was RENU RAWAT

Chandigarh transferred from the bank account of co-accused Lekhraj Pawar to the bank account of the petitioner. It is further alleged that the petitioner withdrew ₹7,50,000/- from the said account through cheque and the remaining ₹50,000/- through an ATM transaction.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and has no direct connection with the alleged fraud. He further submits that the petitioner is a young man aged only 19 years and not the Admin of any WhatsApp group. It is argued that the petitioner has been arrayed as an accused merely on the basis of suspicion, without there being any cogent material on record to establish his involvement in the alleged offence.

4. Notice of motion.

5. Mr. Sandeep Kumar, DAG, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State and vehemently opposes the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner on the ground that the allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature. Learned State counsel has filed the custody certificate in Court, which is taken on record. He further submits that as per the custody certificate, the petitioner is in custody for the last 04 months and 02 days and is not involved in any other case.

6. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

7. After hearing the rival contentions of the learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case that the petitioner is in custody for the 04 months and 02 days; he is not involved in any RENU RAWAT

Chandigarh other case coupled with the fact that the trial of the case is yet to commence and continuous detention of the petitioner would not serve the ends of justice, this Court deems it fit to grant the concession of regular bail to the petitioner during the pendency of the trial.

8. Therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing requisite bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned.

9. Nothing discussed hereinabove shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.

10. It is clarified that if, while on bail so granted through the instant order, the petitioner is found indulged in any other criminal case/activity, it shall be open to the State to seek cancellation of his bail. 14.07.2026

(H.S.GREWAL) renu

JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No RENU RAWAT

Chandigarh