Bolla Ramakrishna vs State Of Haryana

CRM-M-58688 of 2026 (O&M) -1-




IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH

203
CRM-M-58688-2026 (O&M)
Date of decision: 11.11.2026

Bolla Ramakrishna
...Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana
...Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEERJA K. KALSON

Present:- Mr. Harshit Sethi, Advocate
for the petitioner.

Ms. Sheenu Sura, DAG., Haryana.

Mr. Manish Soni, Advocate
for the complainant.
*

NEERJA K. KALSON, J. (Oral)

1. The petitioner has invoked the jurisdiction of this Court
under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023
(corresponding to Section 438 Cr.P.C.), seeking the concession of
anticipatory bail in FIR No. 73 dated 08.08.2026 (Annexure P-3), registered
under Sections 318(4), 319(2), 336(3), 338 and 340(2) of the Bharatiya
Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding to Sections 420, 419, 468, 467 and 471
IPC, respectively), at Police Station Cyber Crime, Sector 20, Panchkula,
District Panchkula.
SANJAY KHAN
2026.11.13 14:23
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document

CRM-M-58688 of 2026 (O&M) -2-
2. The prosecution case emanates from a complaint lodged by
Disha, wife of Vijay Chilana, whose husband is stated to be a partner in M/s
R.S. Construction Co. As per the complainant’s version, on 06.08.2026, the
accountant of the firm downloaded a malicious file received through
WhatsApp, purportedly from a known supplier. Thereafter, an unknown
person, impersonating Vijay Chilana through a spoofed mobile number,
induced the accountant to transfer funds from the firm’s bank accounts. In
this manner, an amount of Rs 3,16,00,000/- was transferred into four
different bank accounts. During investigation, Rs 80,00,000/- was traced to
the ICICI Bank account of M/s Punapureddi Pakashastralu Private Limited,
of which the petitioner is a 50% shareholder.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has sought to distance him
from the transactions in question, principally on the strength of his
resignation dated 10.07.2026 (Annexure P-1). It is contended that the
petitioner had relinquished the office of Director well before the occurrence
and that the affairs of the company, including the operation of its bank
account, were exclusively managed by the Managing Director. The mobile
number and e-mail address linked to the account are also stated to belong to
the latter. It is further urged that no transaction has been shown to have been
personally undertaken or authorised by the petitioner, nor is there any
material establishing his knowledge of the alleged fraudulent activity.
Learned counsel submits that the petitioner had himself initiated criminal
proceedings against the Managing Director upon discovering financial
irregularities. According to learned counsel, the prosecution seeks to
attribute criminal liability merely on the basis of the petitioner’s corporate
SANJAY KHAN
2026.11.13 14:23
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document

CRM-M-58688 of 2026 (O&M) -3-
association, which, in the absence of any material indicating his conscious
participation, cannot justify his arrest. On these premises, anticipatory bail is
sought.
4. Per contra, learned State counsel has vehemently opposed
the petition. Reply by way of affidavit filed by Sh.Aman, HPS, Assistant
Commissioner of Police, Crime, Panchkula, on behalf of the respondent-
State, is taken on record. It is submitted that Rs 80,00,000/-, forming part of
the proceeds of the alleged cyber fraud, was credited to the bank account of
M/s Punapureddi Pakashastralu Private Limited, of which the petitioner is a
50% shareholder. Learned State counsel further submits that transactions
aggregating approximately Rs 2,65,00,000/- were undertaken through the
said account within a span of three days. Particular emphasis has been laid
upon the official record of the Ministry of Corporate Affairs dated
25.08.2026 (Annexure R-7), wherein the petitioner continued to be reflected
as a Director, notwithstanding his purported resignation dated 10.07.2026
(Annexure P-1). It is pointed out that the service request relating to his
resignation was generated only on 15.09.2026, while the digitally signed
document was submitted on 16.09.2026, after the occurrence and the arrest
of the co-accused. Learned State counsel has also referred to the bank
statement (Annexure R-1) and the complaints reflected on the National
Cybercrime Reporting Portal (Annexure R-8), to submit that the same
company account has surfaced in cybercrime complaints originating from
different States.
5. Learned State counsel has further drawn attention to the
following criminal antecedents of the petitioner, as disclosed in the reply:
SANJAY KHAN
2026.11.13 14:23
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document

CRM-M-58688 of 2026 (O&M) -4-
Sr. No. Particulars of case
1. FIR No. 539 dated 07.10.2020, under Sections 153 and
505(2) IPC and Section 67 of the Information Technology
Act, 2000, Police Station Vatsavai, District Krishna, Andhra
Pradesh.
2. FIR No. 243 dated 07.06.2020, under Sections 341, 307 and
506 read with Section 149 IPC, Police Station Vatsavai,
District Krishna, Andhra Pradesh.
3. FIR No. 50 dated 04.03.2026, under Section 353(2) BNS,
2023 (corresponding to Section 505 IPC), Police Station
Denduluru, District Eluru, Andhra Pradesh.
4. FIR No. 107 of 2026 dated 09.08.2026, under Section 66-D
of the Information Technology Act, 2000, and Sections 204,
308(2), 3(5), 318(4) and 319(2) BNS, 2023, Cyber Police
Station, Pune, Maharashtra, concerning the same company
bank account.

It is additionally pointed out that the petitioner’s earlier
application for anticipatory bail was dismissed by the learned Additional
Sessions Judge, Panchkula, on 30.09.2026. Learned State counsel submits
that the investigation is at a crucial stage and that custodial interrogation is
necessary to ascertain the persons exercising effective control over the
company’s account, the movement of the suspected proceeds and the
circumstances surrounding the petitioner’s resignation.
6. Learned counsel representing the complainant has supported
the opposition advanced by the State. Describing the modus operandi as a
“boss scam”, learned counsel submits that the perpetrators, by compromising
electronic communications and impersonating a person exercising financial
authority, induced the transfer of substantial funds into designated accounts.
It is contended that the account of the company associated with the
petitioner was one of the first recipients of the suspected proceeds, having
SANJAY KHAN
2026.11.13 14:23
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document

CRM-M-58688 of 2026 (O&M) -5-
received Rs 80,00,000/-. Reference has been made to the material
accompanying the State’s reply, including Annexure R-6, in support of the
submission concerning the financial trail. Learned counsel has also
questioned the petitioner’s reliance upon the purported resignation dated
10.07.2026 (Annexure P-1), particularly when the statutory filing was
undertaken only in September 2026 and the official record dated 25.08.2026
(Annexure R-7) continued to reflect his directorship. It is urged that the
circumstances, considered in their entirety, do not warrant the exercise of
discretion in favour of the petitioner.
7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have
carefully examined the material available on record.
8. The jurisdiction to grant anticipatory bail, though rooted in
the constitutional guarantee of personal liberty, is required to be exercised
with due regard to the nature and gravity of the accusation, the material
collected during investigation and the necessity of securing an effective
investigation. The protection contemplated under Section 482 BNSS cannot
be claimed as a matter of right. Where the accusations disclose a serious
economic offence involving a substantial financial trail, the Court must
evaluate the circumstances in their entirety, bearing in mind that the interests
of individual liberty must be harmonised with the legitimate demands of
criminal justice.
9. Adverting to the facts of the present case, the circumstances
emerging from the investigation disclose substantial grounds for declining
the discretionary relief sought by the petitioner. An amount of Rs
80,00,000/-, forming part of the suspected proceeds of a cyber fraud
SANJAY KHAN
2026.11.13 14:23
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document

CRM-M-58688 of 2026 (O&M) -6-
involving Rs 3,16,00,000/-, was credited to the bank account of M/s
Punapureddi Pakashastralu Private Limited, as reflected in the bank
statement (Annexure R-1). The petitioner is a 50% shareholder in the said
company. Although corporate association, by itself, does not constitute proof
of criminal liability, the receipt of such a substantial amount in the
company’s account, viewed alongside the circumstances attending the
petitioner’s purported resignation, furnishes a substantial basis for
investigating his role in the transactions. The identity of the persons who
facilitated the use of the account, exercised control over its operations and
dealt with the funds received therein constitutes an integral part of the
investigation.
10. What assumes particular significance is the chronology
surrounding the petitioner’s purported resignation. While he claims to have
resigned from the directorship on 10.07.2026 (Annexure P-1), the official
record of the Ministry of Corporate Affairs dated 25.08.2026 (Annexure R-
7) continued to reflect him as a Director. Furthermore, the service request
concerning his resignation was generated on 15.09.2026, and the digitally
signed document was submitted on 16.09.2026, well after the occurrence
and the arrest of the co-accused. The mere production of a resignation
bearing a date anterior to the occurrence cannot, in the face of the
subsequent chronology highlighted by the prosecution, be regarded as
sufficient to dispel the circumstances warranting further investigation into
the petitioner’s association with the company and its banking operations.
The genuineness of the resignation, the circumstances in which it was
tendered and the petitioner’s actual involvement in the affairs of the
SANJAY KHAN
2026.11.13 14:23
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document

CRM-M-58688 of 2026 (O&M) -7-
company are disputed questions requiring examination upon evidence. Thus,
the plea of resignation does not, at this stage, furnish sufficient grounds for
extending the discretionary protection of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
11. The nature of the accusations lends further gravity to the
matter. Cyber-enabled financial offences have assumed an increasingly
sophisticated character, frequently involving impersonation, manipulation of
electronic communications and the rapid movement of funds through
successive banking channels. The employment of corporate accounts for
receiving and routing suspected proceeds of cyber fraud poses formidable
challenges in identifying the persons responsible and tracing the ultimate
destination of the funds. Such offences transcend the immediate pecuniary
loss suffered by the victim and have wider ramifications for the integrity of
digital financial systems and public confidence in electronic banking. In the
present case, the State has also placed reliance upon cybercrime complaints
originating from different States concerning the same company bank account
(Annexure R-8). The magnitude of the transactions, the manner in which the
suspected proceeds were routed and the wider financial trail emerging
during investigation lend considerable gravity to the accusations and
underscore the necessity of a comprehensive investigation.
12. The petitioner’s criminal antecedents, as disclosed in the
State’s reply, are also relevant to the exercise of judicial discretion. The
pendency of four other FIRs, including a cybercrime case concerning the
same company bank account, constitutes an additional circumstance
requiring consideration. More importantly, the investigation in the present
case is yet to culminate in the presentation of the challan. The prosecution
SANJAY KHAN
2026.11.13 14:23
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document

CRM-M-58688 of 2026 (O&M) -8-
has referred to disclosures made by the arrested co-accused concerning the
use of the company’s bank account and has specifically sought custodial
interrogation of the petitioner to ascertain his role in its operation, identify
the persons involved in facilitating the transactions, examine the
circumstances surrounding his resignation and trace the movement and
ultimate destination of the suspected proceeds of crime. These are specific
and substantial investigative requirements arising from the material collected
thus far, and the prayer for custodial interrogation cannot be characterised as
a mere formality. Granting pre-arrest protection at this stage would not be
conducive to the effective investigation of the accusations in their entirety.
13. The rival contentions concerning the petitioner’s association
with the company, the legal efficacy of his resignation and his involvement
in the impugned transactions raise disputed questions of fact and law, which
cannot be conclusively adjudicated in proceedings for anticipatory bail.
These matters shall remain open for determination at the appropriate stage,
upon appreciation of the evidence in accordance with law.
14. In the conspectus of the circumstances noticed hereinabove,
this Court is satisfied that the nature and gravity of the accusations, coupled
with the material collected during investigation and the necessity of
custodial interrogation, weigh decisively against extending the discretionary
relief of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
15. Accordingly, the present petition stands dismissed.
16. It is clarified that the observations made herein are confined
to the adjudication of the present petition and shall not be construed as an
expression of opinion on the merits of the case. The investigating agency
SANJAY KHAN
2026.11.13 14:23
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document

CRM-M-58688 of 2026 (O&M) -9-
and the learned trial Court shall proceed independently and in accordance
with law, uninfluenced by any observation made herein.


11.11.2026 (NEERJA K. KALSON)
s.khan
JUDGE

Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether reportable Yes/No
SANJAY KHAN
2026.11.13 14:23
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document