MOHD. TOSHIK vs STATE OF UT. CHANDIGARH — CRM-M/24852/2026

Disposed: --ALLOWED on 13th May 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: PHHC010710092026

Filing Number

CRM-M/32901/2026

Filing Date

27-Apr-2026

Registration No

CRM-M/24852/2026

Registration Date

01-May-2026

Judge

Mr. Justice Surya Partap Singh

Coram

Mr. Justice Surya Partap Singh

Bench Type

Single

Category

99 ( 945 )

Sub-Category

40.3 - REGULAR BAIL (UT) ( 218 )

Judicial Branch

CRIMINAL BRANCH

Decision Date

13-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

--ALLOWED

Last updated 01-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.MOHD. TOSHIK

    Adv. SHAKTI MEHTA

  2. 2.CHANDIGARH

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF UT. CHANDIGARH

  2. 2.CHANDIGARH

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 13-May-2026

    Mr. Justice Surya Partap SinghView PDF

    Case Summary: CRM-M/24852/2026 Court Decision: The High Court of Punjab & Haryana granted bail to Mohd. Toshik, who was arrested in a cyber fraud investigation involving illegal bank transfers totaling approximately ₹5.26 lakhs from fraud victims' accounts. Key Reasoning: Justice Surya Partap Singh allowed the bail petition citing: petitioner's 3+ months custody, clean antecedents, no direct complainant, recovery already made, prolonged investigation, and absence of evidence of tampering or non-cooperation. The court emphasized that bail is the general rule (not exception) and referenced Supreme Court precedents on the right to speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution. Conditions: Release on personal and surety bonds with restrictions against witness/evidence tampering, requirement to notify address changes to trial court, and prohibition on leaving India without prior permission. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 27-Apr-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRM-M/24852/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: CRM-M/24852/2026 Court Decision: The High Court of Punjab & Haryana granted bail to Mohd. Toshik, who was arrested in a cyber fraud investigation involving illegal bank transfers totaling approximately ₹5.26 lakhs from fraud victims' accounts. Key Reasoning: Justice Surya Partap Singh allowed the bail petition citing: petitioner's 3+ months custody, clean antecedents, no direct complainant, recovery already made, prolonged investigation, and absence of evidence of tampering or non-cooperation. The court emphasized that bail is the general rule (not exception) and referenced Supreme Court precedents on the right to speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution. Conditions: Release on personal and surety bonds with restrictions against witness/evidence tampering, requirement to notify address changes to trial court, and prohibition on leaving India without prior permission. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case