104 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH

Decided on: 24.12.2025

Yogesh Giri ..... Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab ......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ

Present: Mr. Ashish Soi, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Ms. Ramta Chowdhary, DAG, Punjab.

Rajesh Bhardwaj, J.

1. Prayer in the present petition is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in a case FIR No.01 dated 08.02.2025, registered under Sections 318(4), 3(5) of BNS, 2023 at Police Station Cyber Crime

Jalandhar, District Police Commissionerate, Jalandhar.

2. Succinctly, facts of the case are that an application was filed against unknown persons regarding cheating. As per the inquiry conducted by Assistant Commissioner of Police, Economic Offences and Cyber Crime, Commissionerare Jalandhar, statement of complainant Sanjeev Mahindru was recorded, wherein it was alleged that he is a retired employee from Doordarshan Jalandhar and he has one son and one daughter, both are married and are living in Canada. His wife also went to Canada to meet their children and the complainant is living alone at home to take care of his elderly mother. On 11.11.2024, at about 08:30 a.m., he received Whatsapp call and the caller disclosed him that he was an official from Crime Branch, Delhi and told that his Bank account was used for money laundering and

drug racket. After some time, the complainant received a copy of arrest warrant on his whatsapp number. Thereafter, he also received two more letters and was trapped by the accused person. The complainant was threatened and was forced to transfer Rs.79,144/- to the bank account number provided by the accused. Thereafter, on subsequent dates the complainant was harassed by the sending fake arrest warrants and the accused person obtained all the personal information of the complainant. Under compulsion the complainant transferred Rs.57,55,621/- by RTGS on dated 14.11.2024 into the bank account provided by the accused person. Thus, a request for registration of the FIR was made. On the registration of the FIR, the investigation commenced. During investigation, complicity of the petitioner surfaced and he was also arrayed as an accused in the present case. Apprehending arrest, the petitioner approached the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jalandhar praying for grant of anticipatory bail, however, after hearing both the side, learned Court declined the same, vide order dated 18.11.2025. Hence, the petitioner is before this Court by way of filing the present petition praying for grant of anticipatory bail.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently contended that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He submits that the petitioner himself is a victim, who was trapped by Hackers and Cyber Crime has been committed with him. He submits that the petitioner is a partner in a firm and had visited Vadodara (Gujarat) to purchase goods for his company and paid Rs.2.5 lacs to Maajid. However, as the goods were not supplied to him, Maajid returned the amount. He submits that thereafter, he met the business partner of Maajid and fell into their trap, who cheated him. He has submitted that the petitioner has nothing to do with the present case and nothing is to be recovered from him. He, thus, submits that in these circumstances, the petitioner deserves to be granted anticipatory bail.

4. Per contra, learned counsel for the State has vehemently opposed the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner. She has submitted that an amount of Rs.14 lacs has been credited in the account of the petitioner. She further submits that the petitioner cheated the complainant with an amount of about Rs.60 lacs and thus, his custodial interrogation is required to unearth his role and to recover the said amount. She further submits that the investigation is at initial stage and grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner at this stage, would scuttle the ongoing investigation. She, thus, submits t