IN THE COURT OF VIVEK SINGAL,

ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE-CUM

VACATION JUDGE, HISAR.
(UID NO.HR0483)

*******

Bail Application No. 657 BA of 2022.

CIS No.BA/3518/2022.
CNR No.HRHS01-018449-2022.
Date of Institution 26.12.2022
Date of decision 28.12.2022

Lakshay Dutta, aged 29 years, son of Shri Deepak Dutta, resident of

House No. 6148/2/1, Nicholson Road, Ambala Cantt. Ambala.

.....Applicant.
Versus

State of Haryana .
….Respondent.
FIR No. 677 dated 10.11.2022
Under Sections 419/420 IPC & Section 67 of I.T. Act.
Police Station: Urban Estate, Hisar.

Application for anticipatory bail under section 438 Cr.PC.

Present: Shri Sunil Kumar Dara counsel for the applicant.

Shri Akhil Dalal, Public Prosecutor for State assisted by
Inspector Prahlad Rai and HC Pavitra Singh Cyber Cell,

ORDER:

1. Briefly summarizing the allegations, learned Public

Prosecutor submitted that the applicant called suspended Tehsildar

Manoj Ahlawat on his mobile phone and represented himself to be

Digvijay Chautala and demanded money for solving his service

problem. While making the said call, the applicant used Plivo App. by

(Vivek Singal)
ASJ, Hisar 28.12.2022
Lakshay Dutta versus State
CIS No. BA/3518/2022
2

way of which the name of Digvijay Chautala and mobile number

89298-98989 of Sajjan Jain who is close associate of Digvijay Chautala

was shown on the mobilephone of Manoj Ahlawat. Learned Public

Prosecutor submitted that FIR in this regard was registered by Sajjan

Jain and thereafter statement of Manoj Ahlawat was also taken during

investigation.

2. Learned counsel for applicant submitted that in the FIR that

has been got registered by Sajjan, there is no allegation regarding

demand of any money and moreover after registration of present case,

the applicant was even joined in the investigation. He urged that the

applicant is still ready to join investigation and shall fully co-operate

therein.

3. However, in my view the allegations are serious in nature.

Statement of Manoj Ahlawat recorded during investigation clearly

shows that the caller representing himself to be Digvijay Chautala

demanded money for solving his service problem. During the course of

arguments, learned Public Prosecutor also pointed out that cyber team

made enquiry from Plivo from which it transpired that it is the

applicant who had registered on Polive App. by using his Broadband

connection. Learned Public Prosecutor further pointed out that although

the applicant had come present before Investigating Officer and he was

asked to bring his mobile phone but thereafter the applicant did not turn

up.

(Vivek Singal)
ASJ, Hisar 28.12.2022
Lakshay Dutta versus State
CIS No. BA/3518/2022
3

4. In the considered opinion of this court the manner in which

the applicant is alleged to have impersonated Digvijay Chautala by

using Plivo app. and demanded money from a suspended Tehsildar for

solving his service problem does not call for any leniency. It is well

settled that anticipatory bail is an extra ordinary remedy which can be

invoked in exceptional circumstances. However, the present case does

not present any exceptional circumstances warranting the grant of

anticipatory bail.

5. Having regard to nature of allegations, I am not inclined to

allow present application for anticipatory bail. Therefore, the same is

hereby dismissed. File be consigned to the record room after due

compliance.

Pronounced in Open Court; (Vivek Singal)

28.12.2022 Addl. Sessions Judge-cum-
Vacation Judge Hisar.
UID No.HR-0483

Naresh Gupta
Stenographer-II

(Vivek Singal)
ASJ, Hisar 28.12.2022