CRM-M-18939-2026 (O&M) 1 217 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-18939-2026 (O&M) Date of Decision: 08.07.2026 NISHANT BANSAL ... PETITIONER VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA ... RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S.GREWAL Present:- Mr. K.P.Singh, Advocate and Mr. Bhaskar Sorout, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Vijay Kumar, AAG Haryana. H.S. GREWAL, J. (ORAL) 1. The petitioner is seeking second regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (439 Cr.P.C.) in FIR No.296 dated 20.8.2025, under section 318(4), 61(2) of BNS, 2023 and section 66D of IT Act, 2000 (420, 120-B IPC) (section 66D of IT Act added lateron) registered at Police Station, Cyber Crime Police Station, Gurugram, District Gurugram. 2. The case of the prosecution is that complainant Shakuntla Gulia made a complaint regarding fraudulent siphoning of Rs.1.46 crores via fake investment platform "PTUdry.com". The allegations against the petitioner are that during the course of investigation, beneficiary accounts were located and an amount of Rs. 27 lakhs was stated to have been received in the account of the petitioner. JANKI BHATT 2026.07.08 18:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CRM-M-18939-2026 (O&M) 2

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The petitioner has not derived any benefit from the alleged proceeds of crime. He further submits that the petitioner is in custody for the last 10 months and 07 days and is not involved in any other case. He, thus, prays for grant of bail to the petitioner. 4. Learned State counsel has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of regular bail to the petitioner on the ground of gravity of allegations. 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 10 months and 07 days. 5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 6. 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 last 10 months and 07 days and is not involved in any other case; no witness has been examind yet in spite of issuing repeated summons; the conclusion of trial is likely to take time 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. Moreover, ‘bail is rule and jail is exception’.

7. 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 bonds, surety bonds to the JANKI BHATT 2026.07.08 18:08 satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate/Chief Judicial MagistrateI attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CRM-M-18939-2026 (O&M) 3 concerned. 8. Nothing discussed hereinabove shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. 9. It is clarified that while on bail so granted through the instant order, if the petitioner is found indulging in any other criminal case, it shall be open to the State to seek cancellation of his bail. 10. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. (H.S.GREWAL) 08.07.2026 JUDGE Janki Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No JANKI BHATT 2026.07.08 18:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh

CRM-M-18939-2026 (O&M) 1 217 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-18939-2026 (O&M) Date of Decision: 08.07.2026 NISHANT BANSAL ... PETITIONER VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA ... RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S.GREWAL Present:- Mr. K.P.Singh, Advocate and Mr. Bhaskar Sorout, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Vijay Kumar, AAG Haryana. H.S. GREWAL, J. (ORAL) 1. The petitioner is seeking second regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (439 Cr.P.C.) in FIR No.296 dated 20.8.2025, under section 318(4), 61(2) of BNS, 2023 and section 66D of IT Act, 2000 (420, 120-B IPC) (section 66D of IT Act added lateron) registered at Police Station, Cyber Crime Police Station, Gurugram, District Gurugram. 2. The case of the prosecution is that complainant Shakuntla Gulia made a complaint regarding fraudulent siphoning of Rs.1.46 crores via fake investment platform "PTUdry.com". The allegations against the petitioner are that during the course of investigation, beneficiary accounts were located and an amount of Rs. 27 lakhs was stated to have been received in the account of the petitioner. JANKI BHATT 2026.07.08 18:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CRM-M-18939-2026 (O&M) 2

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The petitioner has not derived any benefit from the alleged proceeds of crime. He further submits that the petitioner is in custody for the last 10 months and 07 days and is not involved in any other case. He, thus, prays for grant of bail to the petitioner. 4. Learned State counsel has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of regular bail to the petitioner on the ground of gravity of allegations. 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 10 months and 07 days. 5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 6. 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 last 10 months and 07 days and is not involved in any other case; no witness has been examind yet in spite of issuing repeated summons; the conclusion of trial is likely to take time 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. Moreover, ‘bail is rule and jail is exception’.

7. 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 bonds, surety bonds to the JANKI BHATT 2026.07.08 18:08 satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate/Chief Judicial MagistrateI attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CRM-M-18939-2026 (O&M) 3 concerned. 8. Nothing discussed hereinabove shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. 9. It is clarified that while on bail so granted through the instant order, if the petitioner is found indulging in any other criminal case, it shall be open to the State to seek cancellation of his bail. 10. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. (H.S.GREWAL) 08.07.2026 JUDGE Janki Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No JANKI BHATT 2026.07.08 18:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh