CRM-M No.52626 of 2019 1
213
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M No.52626 of 2019
Date of Decision: 10.02.2020
Karan Singh
……Petitioner
Vs
State of Haryana
…..Respondent
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJ MOHAN SINGH
Present:Mr. Raman Chawla, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. Anmol Malik, AAG, Haryana.
Mr. Amandeep Chhabra, Advocate
for the complainant.
****
RAJ MOHAN SINGH, J.(Oral)
Petitioner seeks grant of regular bail under Section 439
Cr.P.C in case bearing FIR No.163 dated 01.03.2019 registered
under Sections 420, 506 IPC (Section 406 IPC added later on)
at Police Station City Bhiwani, District Bhiwani.
An amount of Rs.26 lacs was deposited in favour of the
Registry of this Court. In CRM-M No.15444 of 2019, interim
anticipatory bail was granted to the petitioner after deposit of
four demand drafts amounting to Rs.26 lacs in the registry of
1 of 5
11-02-2020 00:18:10 :::
CRM-M No.52626 of 2019 2
this Court. The said amount has been deposited in the official
account. Thereafter, the Court proceeded to record divergent
stand taken by the petitioner and the complainant viz-a-viz the
remaining amount of Rs.26 lacs. According to the petitioner, the
said amount was handed over to the complainant in the
presence of the witnesses, whereas the complainant has denied
the receipt of the said amount. Petitioner also filed additional
affidavit in the context of the alleged amount, wherein he had
taken a stand that a sum of Rs.26 lacs was paid. He further
relied upon another affidavit, where some loan transactions of
Rs.1,80,00,000/- was alleged against the petitioner.
Owing to the nature of controversy pending between
the parties, this Court, refrained from granting anticipatory bail
to the petitioner, however directed the police to carry out
thorough investigation and conclude the investigation, positively
within one month under the supervision of Superintendent of
Police from 01.10.2019 i.e. the date on which anticipatory bail
was rejected.
The allegations against the petitioner are that the
petitioner and Vikram Tyagi are friends. Vikram Tyagi is an
employee in Indian Railways. Petitioner borrowed an amount of
Rs.8 lacs from Vikram Tyagi and he could not repay the same.
In September, 2018, the petitioner assured Vikram Tyagi that he
2 of 5
::: Downloaded on – 11-02-2020 00:18:11 :::
CRM-M No.52626 of 2019 3
would manage to pass the candidates in Indian Railways
examination by hacking the system. Railway Recruitment
Boards had Invited online applications from eligible candidates
for the recruitment of various posts in Level 1 st of 7th CPC Pay
Matrix in various units of Indian Railways vide centralized
employment notice (CEN) No.02/2018. Complainant Vishnu was
also appearing in the said examination. Vikram Tyagi is a
neighbour of Vishu (complainant) and he assured the
complainant that Karan would manage to get him passed in the
examination. Complainant and one Harbir sent the admit cards
to Vikram Tyagi through whatsapp who forwarded the same to
the petitioner. Petitioner used to prepare a video by using the
KineMaster Pro Video Editor app. He used to take the
photograph and roll number from the admit cards received by
him through whatsapp from Vikram Tyagi. One question was
also included in each video by Karan to make the candidates
believe that the system was actually hacked by him.
During interrogation, accused has revealed that
questions were copied by him by searching online on Google.
He had also seen the online mock tests link provided by RRBs
so as to include same screen in video to give impression to
candidates that the system was actually hacked by him. Vikram
Tyagi had played the role of middleman. He is the person who
3 of 5
::: Downloaded on – 11-02-2020 00:18:11 :::
CRM-M No.52626 of 2019 4
contacted the complainant and Harbir and assured them that
the petitioner would manage to hack the system during the
examination and therefore, candidates appearing in examination
would be able to get success. The complainant and Harbir
further contacted other candidates. Further allegation is that an
amount of Rs.2 lacs per candidate was given to Karan through
Vikram Tyagi. The analysis of audio clips/video clips/CDRs
reveals that both were in regular touch in relevant period and
transaction had happened in this manner. No candidate could
get through the examination for which the petitioner had
assured Vikram Tyagi and took the money.
It is not in dispute that total amount collected by the
petitioner in collusion with Vikram Tyagi was Rs.52 lacs out of
which an amount of Rs.26 lacs was deposited by the petitioner
which is still lying in the Registry. Qua remaining amount of
Rs.26 lacs, there is an assertion that said amount has been paid
to the complainant party, however, the said fact has been
denied by learned counsel for the complainant.
In compliance of order dated 01.11.2019, challan has
already been presented. Petitioner is in custody since
30.10.2019.
Perusal of the challan would show that there is no
reference of remaining amount of Rs.26 lacs and the factum of
4 of 5
::: Downloaded on – 11-02-2020 00:18:11 :::
CRM-M No.52626 of 2019 5
compromise between the parties has also not been commented
upon. Charges have been framed.
Learned State counsel on instructions from SI Bhushan
Kumar states that no prosecution witness has been examined
so far, out of total 34 witnesses.
Keeping in view the custody of the petitioner, filing of
the challan and framing of charges, I am of the view that at this
stage, without meaning anything on merits of the case, regular
bail of the petitioner can be considered. Petitioner is directed to
be released on regular bail subject to his furnishing adequate
bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court. The
amount deposited by the petitioner shall remain deposited in the
Registry of this Court and the same shall be disbursed to the
trial Court only after conclusion of the trial for lawful payment to
successful party.
Nothing expressed hereinabove would be construed to
be an expression of any opinion on merits of the case.
10.02.2020 (RAJ MOHAN SINGH)
Prince JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether reportable Yes/No
5 of 5
::: Downloaded on – 11-02-2020 00:18:11 :::