WASEEM RAJA ALIAS WASEEM RAJA SIDDIQI v. STATE OF HARYANA

copy of FIR annexed with the bail petitions, which reads as follows:

"Regarding Fraud, Sir, I request that I am Rajkumar Vats Advocate son of Devkaran Sharma resident of Vakil Colony Hansi. On 19.11.2024 at around 9 am on my mobile number. I received a WhatsApp call on 94163xxxx from an unknown person with mobile no. 82699xxxx and he said that a parcel has come to Bombay Customs from Malaysia in your name and an drug is found in it. Is this parcel yours, I said no, I have not ordered any parcel. Then he said that Bombay Police and CBI will investigate this matter. After that he made me talk to another officer and he told me that we have discharged your drug case but Sanjay Singh, who is the ex-manager of HDFC, has opened a fake account in your name in which Rs. 32 crore is deposited. Sanjay Singh and his two other associates have together collected money in an illegal manner. Then I said that I do not know Sanjay Singh or the person who opened the fake account. Neither do I have any connection with them. Then he said that Sanjay Singh has been arrested by the police and Sanjay told that he has given a commission of crores of rupees to Raj Kumar Vats for opening this account. Sanjay and his two companions have sent about 80-85 children to Malaysia illegally. The illegal money taken from the parents of the children has been deposited in a fake account in your name of Rs. 32 crores. We have to investigate you in this regard, Give us the details of all your and your wife's accounts and tell how much money is in each account, on which I gave all the details about 5 accounts of mine and my wife Kalpana Vats. And I told him that I have about 14 crores rupees in my accounts. After this he said that this case is going on in CBI court Mumbai. The case is serious so you will have to come to Mumbai for investigation. I said that I am a 78- year-old person, I am

3 of 6

unable to walk and I am a heart patient. I cannot come here. Then Amit Kumar said that I have talked to my senior Anurag Jain, he said that if you cannot come then you have been digitally arrested. Verification of your money is to be done, you should immediately go to the bank and break all the FDs, and do RTGS in the CBI court account number I will tell you. If your money is found to be correct then it will be returned to you within 4-5 days, otherwise legal action will be taken against you. Then on 19.11.24, 39 lakh rupees were deposited from Rajkumar Yats' account and 47 lakh rupees from Kalpana's account in the account number 0824050xxxxx IFSC CODE- ICIC0000824 told by him. Then he said that you should not talk to anyone else about this matter. If you leak information during investigation, you may be punished with 3 to 6 years of imprisonment. The next day again I got a call asking me to transfer money from other accounts as well. Then on 20.11.24, I deposited Rs. 14 lakhs from Rajkumar Vats's account and Rs.22 lakhs from Kalpana Vats's account through RTGS in the account no. 201000xxxx of Bandhan Bank. Then on 21.11.24, I deposited Rs. 650000 from the joint account in the account no. 3797020xxxxxx of Bandhan Bank. On 26.11.24, I deposited Rs. 5 lakhs from Kalpana Vats's account in the account no. 20100028xxxxx of Bandhan Bank as mentioned by her. On 26.11.24 my wife Kalpana called my brother in law Dr. Rakesh Bhardwaj at home and told him the entire incident, to which my brother in law said that you have been subjected to online fraud. I was taken into confidence and cheated of Rs. 1 crore 33 lakhs & 50 thousand. Then we filed online complaint no.31311240064314 and complaint no. 21311240051594 in this regard. Please take legal action."

5 Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner(s) contend that the petitioners Gulhasan Ansari and Waseem Khan were arrested on 27.12.2024

4 of 6

whereas accused Waseem Raja was arrested on 09.04.2025. He contends that as per the allegations levelled, the complainant was digitally arrested and was compelled to transfer a sum of Rs.1.33 crores into different accounts. It is contended that as per the allegations, the petitioner Gulhasan Ansari along with one Hasin Khan opened a company under the name and style of M/s Miraya Enterprises. It is contended by the counsel for the respective petitioners that an amount of Rs.86 lakhs out of Rs.1.33 crores was transferred to the account of one Apurba Biswas who has been granted the concession of regular bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 15.07.2025 passed in CRM-M-20608-2025. It is contended that the investigation in the case is already complete and that the petitioners are not required for any further investigation. They further submit that accused Waseem Raja and Gulhasan Ansari are not involved in any other criminal case. It is contended that the case of the petitioners would be on a better footing as compared to Apurba Biswas who has been granted the concession of regular bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 15.07.2025 from whom an amount of Rs.86 Lakhs was recovered. It is submitted that four co-accused have been granted the concession of regular bail by this Court and 10 accused persons have been granted the concession of regular bail by the trial Court.

6 State counsel, on the other hand, reiterates the allegations set out in the FIR and contended that the petitioners along with other accused had threatened digital arrest of the complainant and fleeced him of his hard earned money. She, however, does not dispute the factum of release of other co-accused on bail by the trial Court as well as by this Court and that the

5 of 6

case of the petitioners is on better footing than that of Apurba Biswas who has been granted the concession of regular bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 15.07.2025.

7 Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the facts noticed above; the period of custody undergone by the petitioners; the stage of the case where the trial is yet to commence and that co-accused have been granted the concession of regular bail by this Court as well as by the trial Court, I deem it appropriate to extend the benefit of parity to the present petitioners. Accordingly, the present petitions are allowed. The petitioners are ordered to be released on bail on their furnishing requisite bail bond/surety bond to the satisfaction of the Trial Court/Duty Magistrate, concerned.

8 It is made clear that the petitioners shall not extend any threat and shall not influence any prosecution witnesses in any manner directly or indirectly.

9 The observation made hereinabove shall not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case and the trial Court shall decide the case on the basis of available material.

10 A photocopy of the order be placed on the connected file(s).

October 15, 2025. (VINOD S. BHARDWAJ) raj arora JUDGE

Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No

6 of 6