CRM-M/28623/2026 of LOBSANG TSULTRIM Vs STATE OF HARYANA on 9 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. 45 dated 10.02.2026 under Sections 318(4) BNS/ 420 IPC, 319 BNS/416 IPC, 61(2) BNS/ 120-B IPC and 42(2) (a), 42(3) (f) of Telecommunications Act, 2023 and 66 D IT Act registered at Police Station Cyber Crime East, District Gurugram, Haryana.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner procured three mule Indian SIM cards from one girl, namely Lalmuanpauii @ Nancy, and handed over the same to co-accused Ngawang Gyaltsen for facilitating the commission of cyber fraud.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that the petitioner is neither the owner nor the tenant of the premises from where the alleged electronic devices and equipment are stated to have been recovered. It is further submitted that the co-accused, namely Ngawang Gyaltsen, has RENU RAWAT

Chandigarh already been granted the concession of regular bail by the competent Court. Therefore, it is argued that the continued incarceration of the petitioner would serve no useful purpose and that he deserves the concession of regular bail.

4. Notice of motion.

5. Mr. Vijay Kumar, learned AAG, Haryana, 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 submits that, as per the custody certificate, the petitioner has remained in custody for the last 04 months and 25 days and is not involved in any other criminal case.

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

7. After hearing the rival submissions and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly that the petitioner has remained in custody for the last 04 months and 25 days; that he is not involved in any other criminal case; that the co-accused has already been granted regular bail by the competent Court; and that the conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time, this Court is of the considered view that the further incarceration of the petitioner would serve no useful purpose. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed, and the petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail during the pendency of the trial, subject to his furnishing requisite bail bonds and surety RENU RAWAT

Chandigarh bonds to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate concerned.

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. 09.07.2026

(H.S.GREWAL) renu

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

Chandigarh