O&M) Aditya Kumar Jain Aditya Kumar Jain v. U.T. Chandigarh U.T. Chandigarh
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH AT CHANDIGARH 208+210 49099-2025(O&M); CRM-M-49099 CRM-M-49988 49988-2025(O&M) Date of decision: 27.10.2025 Date of decision: 27 1. CRM-M-49099 49099-2025(O&M) Aditya Kumar Jain Aditya Kumar Jain ...Petitioner VERSUS U.T. Chandigarh U.T. Chandigarh ...Respondent 2. CRM-M-49988 49988-2025(O&M) Vijay Kumar Yogi Vijay Kumar Yogi ...Petitioner VERSUS State of U.T. Chandigarh State of U.T. Chandigarh ...Respondent
Legal Reasoning
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD S. BHARDWAJ HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD S. BHARDWAJ Present :- Mr. (in CRM-M-49099-2025). (in , for the petitioner, . P.S. Punia, Advocate, for the petitioner Mr. Rajesh Gupta, Advocate; Mr. Bharat Raj Yogi, Advocate, Mr. Rajesh Gupta, Advocate; Mr. Bharat Raj Yogi, Advocate, Mr. Rajesh Gupta, Advocate; Mr. Bharat Raj Yogi, Advocate, for the petitioner (in CRM-M-49988 for the petitioner (in 49988-2025) Ms. Manish Bansal, Public Prosecutor Ms. Public Prosecutor for U.T. Chandigarh. ***** VINOD S. BHARDWAJ, J. (Oral) VINOD S. BHARDWAJ CRM-35854-2025 2025 in CRM-M-49988-2025 Allowed, as prayed for. Allowed, as prayed for. CRM-M-49099 2025 49099-2025 & CRM-M-49988-2025 Both the present petitions arising out of the same FIR have been Both the present petitions arising out of the same FIR have been Both the present petitions arising out of the same FIR have been decided by common order. decided by common order. 2. The petitioners herein are seeking regular bail in case bearing The petitioners herein are seeking regular bail in case bearing The petitioners herein are seeking regular bail in case bearing FIR No. 0033 dated 17.04.2025 registered under Sections 319(2), 319(3), FIR No. 0033 dated 17.04.2025 registered under Sections 319(2), 319(3), FIR No. 0033 dated 17.04.2025 registered under Sections 319(2), 319(3), 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2) & 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340( Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 at Police Station Cyber Crime, Chandigarh. Police Station Cyber Crime, Chandigarh. SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2025.10.27 19:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 208+210 CRM CRM-M-49099-2025(O&M) CRM-M-49988-2025(O&M) CRM 2 3. instant prosecution has been launched Briefly summarized, the instant prosecution has been launched Briefly summarized, the at the instance of the complainant Ashok Kumar S/o Nanak Chand, who at the instance of the complainant Ashok Kumar S/o Nanak Chand at the instance of the complainant Ashok Kumar S/o Nanak Chand started trading with Zerodha Company reported to the police that he had started trading with Zerodha Company reported to the police that he Ms. Rekha Aggarwal contacted since October, 2024. On 18.12.2024, one Ms. Rekha Aggarwal contacted since October, 2024. On 18.12.2024, him telephonically and asked him to do online trading with their company him telephonically and asked him to do online trading with their company him telephonically and asked him to do online trading with their company IBKR and assured to give more profits. She had IBKR and assured to give more profits. Sh e had also given mobile number Mr. Rajiv Mehta and asked to contact him. Mr. Rajiv Mehta was Mr. Rajiv Mehta and asked to contact of one Mr. Rajiv Mehta and asked to contact client Manager and used to look after the client Manager and used to look after the finance department. The complainant contacted Mr. Rajiv Mehta, who sent a link to him on his inant contacted Mr. Rajiv Mehta, who sent a link to him on his whatsapp. As soon as he clicked the link, IBKR App whatsapp. As soon as he clicked the link IBKR App got downloaded on his mobile number. Mr. Rajiv Mehta taught him how to deposit money on App mobile number. Mr. Rajiv Mehta taught him how to deposit money on App mobile number. Mr. Rajiv Mehta taught him how to deposit money on App by an option. The complainant The complainant deposited Rs. 56,26,000/ deposited Rs. 56,26,000/- on various dates in details of mobile numbers and the account sent by Mr. Rajiv Mehta and that details of mobile numbers and the account sent by Mr. Rajiv Mehta bank accounts had had been given in the complaint. been given in the complaint. The complainant also used to chat with Ms. Rekha Aggarwal on WhatsApp and w to chat with Ms. Rekha Aggarwal on WhatsApp and when he asked to withdraw some amount, then, he was removed from the WhatsApp group. withdraw some amount, then, he was removed from the WhatsApp group. withdraw some amount, then, he was removed from the WhatsApp group. The accused thus induced him to pay more money and misappropriated his thus induced him to pay more money and misappropriated his hard earned money to the tune of Rs. 56,26,000/ hard earned money to the tune of Rs. 56,26,000/- and committed fraud with him. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners contend that an amount of Learned counsel for the petitioners contend that an amount of Learned counsel for the petitioners contend that an amount of Rs.37 lakhs approximately had been credited to the account of co-accused- Rs.37 lakhs approximately had been credited to the accou Rs.37 lakhs approximately had been credited to the accou Mukesh Kumar, his disclosure Mukesh Kumar. On arrest of co-accused-Mukesh Kumar, his disclosure Mukesh Kumar. On arrest of co merely opened the bank account statement was recorded as per which he had merely opened the bank account statement was recorded as per which he had Ramji Lal Meena and then the registered loan number on the asking of one Ramji Lal Meena and then the registered loan number on the asking of SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2025.10.27 19:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 208+210 CRM CRM-M-49099-2025(O&M) CRM-M-49988-2025(O&M) CRM 3 was nominated by Ramji Lal on the said customer application form which was nominated by Ramji Lal on the said customer appl accused Ramji Lal Meena later disclosed that he Meena himself. The said co-accused Ramji Lal Meena later disclosed that he Meena himself. The said co had also obtained certain accounts from the petitioner-Aditya Kumar Jain (in had also obtained certain accounts from the petitioner had also obtained certain accounts from the petitioner CRM-M-49099- -2025) and petitioner-Vijay Kumar Yogi (in Vijay Kumar Yogi (in CRM-M-49988- 2025). 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners contend that the petitioners Learned counsel for the petitioners contend that the petitioners Learned counsel for the petitioners contend that the petitioners are in custody for last more than 05 months and that during the course of are in custody for last more than 05 months and that during the course of are in custody for last more than 05 months and that during the course of investigation, no recovery has been effected from them pursuant to the investigation, no recovery has been effected investigation, no recovery has been effected ontend that the Investigation Agency has not been alleged disclosure. They contend that the Investigation Agency has not been alleged disclosure. They c able to link the petitioners to any account details/customer application forms able to link the petitioners to any account details/customer application forms able to link the petitioners to any account details/customer application forms of any other third-party being provided wherein any financial transaction of any other third wherein any financial transactions had taken place. taken place. They further contend that the inves that the investigation in the present case has already been completed. has already been completed. The final report The final report has also been filed. The charge has been framed on 25.09.2025 but no evidence has been recorded so charge has been framed on 25.09.2025 but no evidence has been recorded so charge has been framed on 25.09.2025 but no evidence has been recorded so far. He further contends that there are total 15 witnesses and it is magisterial far. He further contends that there are total 15 witnesses and it is magisterial far. He further contends that there are total 15 witnesses and it is magisterial ial, which is likely to take a long time in its conclusion. They further trial, which is likely to take a long time in its conclusion. They further ial, which is likely to take a long time in its conclusion. They further submit that the petitioners are not involved in any other criminal case and no submit that the petitioners are not involved in any other criminal case and no submit that the petitioners are not involved in any other criminal case and no evidence has been collected has been collected by the Investigating Agency to by the Investigating Agency to prove that any iled by the petitioners in the FIR in question. financial benefit has been availed by the petitioners in the FIR in question. financial benefit has been ava 6. Learned State Counsel however contends that the name of the Learned State Counsel however contends that the name of the Learned State Counsel however contends that the name of the petitioners figured in the disclosure statement petitioners figured in the disclosure statement of Ramji Lal Meena (petitioner in CRM , whose petition has been withdrawn CRM-M-48824-2025, whose petition has been withdrawn today) and the petitioners were act and the petitioners were actively involved in facilitating siphoning ively involved in facilitating siphoning of funds from innocent investors, who were lured to make investments. He funds from innocent investors, who were lured to make investments. He funds from innocent investors, who were lured to make investments. He SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2025.10.27 19:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 208+210 CRM CRM-M-49099-2025(O&M) CRM-M-49988-2025(O&M) CRM 4 contends that a total amount of Rs.56,00,000/- approximately has been contends that a total amount of Rs.56,00,000/ contends that a total amount of Rs.56,00,000/ siphoned off by way of the aforesaid cyber crime. He however does not off by way of the aforesaid cyber crime. He however does not dispute that the name of the petitioners cropped up in the disclosure dispute that the name of the petitioners cropped up in the disclosure dispute that the name of the petitioners cropped up in the disclosure statement made by co-accused- Mukesh Kumar statement made by co Mukesh Kumar and that other issues pertaining to the supply of forms/accounts and financial benefits are yet to pertaining to the supply of forms/accounts and financial benefits pertaining to the supply of forms/accounts and financial benefits ring the course of the trial. He specifically submits that it is be established during the course of the trial. He specifically submits that it is be established du a magisterial trial and that no evidence has been recorded so far. He also a magisterial trial and that no evidence has been recorded so far. He also a magisterial trial and that no evidence has been recorded so far. He also does not dispute that the petitioners do not suffer from any criminal does not dispute that the petitioners do not suffer from any criminal does not dispute that the petitioners do not suffer from any criminal antecedents. 7. for the respective parties and have I have heard learned counsel for the respective parties and have I have heard learned counsel gone through the documents appended alongwith the present petitions. gone through the documents appended alongwith the present petitions. gone through the documents appended alongwith the present petitions. 8. Taking Taking into consideration, the into consideration, the stage of the trial, clean antecedents of the petitioners, the arguable issues pertaining to the criminal antecedents of the petitioners, the arguable issues pertaining to the criminal antecedents of the petitioners, the arguable issues pertaining to the criminal nt of the petitioners and also the fact that the petitioners were involvement of the petitioners and also the fact that the petitioners were nt of the petitioners and also the fact that the petitioners were nominated as accused on the basis of disclosure statement made by the co- nominated as accused on the basis of disclosure statement made by the co nominated as accused on the basis of disclosure statement made by the co Mukesh Kumar and such disclosure is not corroborated by any accused-Mukesh Kumar and such disclosure is not corroborated by any Mukesh Kumar and such disclosure is not corroborated by any recovery, I deem it appropriate to allow the peti tions. deem it appropriate to allow the petitions. 9. Accordingly, Accordingly, Accordingly, the the the instant petitions are allowed and instant petition instant petition the petitioners (in CRM CRM-M-49099-2025 and CRM- -M-49988-2025) are ordered furnishing bail/surety bonds to to be admitted to regular bail subject to their furnishing bail/surety bonds to to be admitted to regular bail subject to the satisfaction of the satisfaction of the satisfaction of the the the trial Court/Duty Magistrate/Illaqa Magistrate trial Court/Duty Magistrate/Illaqa Magistrate trial Court/Duty Magistrate/Illaqa Magistrate concerned. 10. It is made clear that the petitioners It is made clear that the petitioner s shall not extend any threat and shall not influence any prosecution witness in any manner directly or and shall not influence any prosecution witness in any manner directly and shall not influence any prosecution witness in any manner directly SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2025.10.27 19:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 208+210 CRM CRM-M-49099-2025(O&M) CRM-M-49988-2025(O&M) CRM indirectly. 5 11. The observation made hereinabove shall not be construed as an The observation made hereinabove shall not be construed as an The observation made hereinabove shall not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case and the trial Court shall decide the case expression on the merits of the case and the trial Court shall decide the case expression on the merits of the case and the trial Court shall decide the case on the basis of available material. on the basis of available material. 27.10.2025 Sumit Gusain Whether speaking/reasoned : Whether speaking/reasoned : Whether reportable Whether reportable Yes/No Yes/No (VINOD S. BHARDWAJ (VINOD S. BHARDWAJ) JUDGE SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2025.10.27 19:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document