Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Regular Bail in Family ID Tampering Case; Holds Further Custody Not Warranted Post-Challan

Case Name: Yogesh Kumar v. State of Haryana
Date of Judgment: 11 December 2025
Citation: CRM-M-62296-2025
Bench: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sumeet Goel

Held: The Punjab and Haryana High Court granted regular bail to the petitioner accused of tampering with income details in Family IDs on the Mera Parivar Portal, resulting in wrongful issuance of benefits under government schemes. The Court held that since the investigation was complete, the challan had been presented, none of the prosecution witnesses had been examined, and there was no material to suggest likelihood of absconding or tampering with evidence, continued incarceration of the petitioner as an undertrial was not justified.

Summary: The petitioner sought regular bail in connection with an FIR alleging manipulation of income data in Family IDs on the Mera Parivar Portal through unauthorised access and misuse of digital signatures, leading to wrongful extension of government benefits. The prosecution alleged that fraudulent entries were made in multiple Family IDs, attracting offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, the Haryana Parivar Pehchan Act, the Information Technology Act, and subsequently the Prevention of Corruption Act.

The petitioner contended that he was only a Data Entry Operator with no role in verification of entries, that the investigation stood concluded, and that continued custody served no useful purpose. The State opposed bail citing the seriousness of the allegations.

The High Court observed that the prosecution had completed investigation and filed the challan, while the trial was yet to commence with no witnesses examined. The Court found no material indicating that the petitioner was likely to abscond or interfere with the prosecution evidence. It further held that mere involvement in other FIRs could not, by itself, justify denial of bail when the facts of the present case otherwise warranted release. Applying settled principles governing grant of bail, the Court concluded that further incarceration of the petitioner as an undertrial was not warranted.

Decision: The petition was allowed, and the petitioner was ordered to be released on regular bail subject to conditions, including non-tampering with evidence, appearance before the trial court, surrender of passport, and cooperation with the trial.