SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Online)(P&H) 7285

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
AJJU ALIAS AJHAD – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF HARYANA – Respondent



IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

208 DATE OF DECISION: 07.01.2025 AJJU ALIAS AJHAD ...PETITIONER Versus STATE OF HARYANA ... RESPONDENT CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MOUDGIL Present: Mr. Satish Chaudhary, Advocate for the petitioner(s).

Mr. Chetan Sharma, DAG, Haryana.

***

SANDEEP MOUDGIL, J (ORAL)

1. Relief Sought This petition has been filed under Section 439 Criminal Procedure Code 1973 with a prayer for regular bail to the petitioner in FIR No. 79 dated 13.06.2024 under sections 419/420/467/468/471/34/ 120-B of Indian Penal Code, 1860 registered at Police Station Cyber Crime, Nuh District Nuh.

2. Prosecution story set up in the present case as per the version in the FIR reads as under :-

Sir. it is submitted that I Dilbag s/o Noor Mohammad r/o Rithath PS Pinagwan District Nuh and is Ex-Sarpanch. Which appx.2/3 days ago I received a call on my mobile no. 9813361019 from mobile no. 9253438429 who told his name DSP Shamsher, I was already known to DSP Shamsher, I thought that the same DSP Sahab is speaking, which I had no conversation with DSP Shamsher for many days and mobile no. of DSO Shamsher was deleted from my mobile. I asked the person calling from mobile no. 9253438429 about well being of understanding DSP after being told well he switched of phone. I checked on my whatsapp then found photo of DSP in uniform on mobile no. 9253438429 and true caller also depicts name Shamsher Singh DSP and photo of DSP in uniform was installed. Thereafter next day call came from the above said mobile no. and said that brother I am feeling shame saying to you, there is problem in my family which I am in sudden need of Rs. 95,000/-, you please transfer Rs. 95,000/- in my SBI Bank account No. ***0870. Which I will return your money back on next day. I taking up caller of mobile no. 9253438429 and being understood as DSP Shamsher transferred cash Rs. 95,000/from phone pe no. of my younger brother Mubarik vide UTR NO. 416475531715 which I gave Rs. 95,000/- cash to my brother Mubarik. Afterthat next day DSP Shamsher made call and demanded money again, I doubted over his talking that this person is not Shamsher and some unknown person has committed cheated with me posing as fake DSP Shamsher Person posing as bogus DSP Shamsher on calling from mobile no. 9253438429 who cheated with me, strong legal action should be taken against him and my Rs. 95,000/- should be recovered. Note - screen shot phone pe, whatsapp chatting and screenshot of true caller are hereby attached. Sd/- Dilbag s/o Noor Mohd. r/o Rithath PS Pinagwan District Nuh dated

13.06.2024.’

3. Contentions On behalf of the petitioner Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He submits that as per the allegations, the complainant has been cheated of Rs. 95,000/- due to impersonation as DSP whereas the petitioner has been nominated by the other co-accused person involved in this FIR.

He has argued that the amount in question was not transferred from the account of the complainant into the account of the petitioner and he has no concern with the alleged offence. He has further argued that the antecedents of the petitioner are clean and he is not involved in any other case.

On behalf of the State On the other hand, learned State Counsel appearing on advance notice, accepts notice on behalf of respondent-State and has filed the custody certificate of the petitioner, which is taken on record. According to which, the petitioner is behind bars for 4 months and 1 day.

Learned State Counsel on instructions from the Investigating Officer opposes the prayer for grant of regular bail stating that the allegations of cheating are levelled against the petitioner but is not in a position to controvert the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner.

4. Analysis Be that as it may, from the above discussion, it can be culled out that the petitioner has already suffered sufficient incarceration i.e. 4 mon

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top