Judgment · High Court · 2026

Judgment

#1. 482 of Bharatiya Present petition has been filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Present petition has been filed Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter to be referred as ‘the BNSS’) Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter to be referred as ‘the BNSS’) Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter to be referred as ‘the BNSS’) Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter to be referred as ‘the BNSS’)

bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR for grant of pre-arrest/anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR for grant of No.74 dated dated 01.04.2025, registered for the offences punishable under , registered for the offences punishable under 318(4) of BNS and Section 13 of Punjab Travel Professionals Sections 318(4) of BNS and Section 13 of Punjab Travel Professionals 318(4) of BNS and Section 13 of Punjab Travel Professionals Sections Civil Lines, Patiala. (Regulation) Act, 2014, at Police Station Civil Lines, Patiala. (Regulation) Act, 2014,

#2. The case of the prosecution, as emerging from the FIR, is that The case of the prosecution, as emerging from the FIR, is that The case of the prosecution, as emerging from the FIR, is that em Singh (respondent No.2 herein) alleged that the complainant namely Prem Singh (respondent No.2 herein) alleged that em Singh (respondent No.2 herein) alleged that the complainant namely Pr the petitioner, who was running an immigration business in the name and the petitioner, who was running an immigration business in the name and the petitioner, who was running an immigration business in the name and the petitioner, who was running an immigration business in the name and style of ‘Sahi Immigration’, represented that she could arrange a United style of ‘Sahi Immigration’, represented that she could arrange a United style of ‘Sahi Immigration’, represented that she could arrange a United style of ‘Sahi Immigration’, represented that she could arrange a United ovepreet Kingdom work permit visa for the son of the complainant namely Lovepreet Kingdom work permit visa for the son of the complainant namely L Kingdom work permit visa for the son of the complainant namely L law namely Harjot Kaur. On the basis of such Singh and daughter-in-law namely Harjot Kaur. On the basis of such law namely Harjot Kaur. On the basis of such Singh and daughter assurance, the complainant allegedly paid an amount of ₹28,40,000/- to the to the assurance, the complainant allegedly paid an amount of assurance, the complainant allegedly paid an amount of despite receiving the aforesaid petitioner. It has been further alleged that despite receiving the aforesaid petitioner. It has been further alleged that petitioner. It has been further alleged that CRM-M- -28594-2026 2 ailed to secure the promised visa. When the amount, the petitioner had failed to secure the promised visa. When the ailed to secure the promised visa. When the amount, the petitioner had f complainant demanded the return of his money, certain cheques were issued complainant demanded the return of his money, certain cheques were issued complainant demanded the return of his money, certain cheques were issued complainant demanded the return of his money, certain cheques were issued by the petitioner. On presentation, one cheque was honoured whereas the by the petitioner. On presentation, one cheque was honoured whereas the by the petitioner. On presentation, one cheque was honoured whereas the by the petitioner. On presentation, one cheque was honoured whereas the remaining cheques were dishonoured. As per the complainant-respond remaining cheques were dishonoured. As per the complainant remaining cheques were dishonoured. As per the complainant No.2, the petitioner neither returned the entire amount nor fulfilled the No.2, the petitioner neither returned the entire amount nor fulfilled the No.2, the petitioner neither returned the entire amount nor fulfilled the No.2, the petitioner neither returned the entire amount nor fulfilled the assurances given to the complainant. During the course of enquiry assurances given to the complainant. During the course of enquiry assurances given to the complainant. During the course of enquiry assurances given to the complainant. During the course of enquiry conducted by the police authorities, it was allegedly found that the petitioner conducted by the police authorities, it was allegedly found that the petitioner conducted by the police authorities, it was allegedly found that the petitioner conducted by the police authorities, it was allegedly found that the petitioner e for carrying on the business of providing did not possess any valid licence for carrying on the business of providing e for carrying on the business of providing did not possess any valid licenc overseas placement or visa services and had induced the complainant to part overseas placement or visa services and had induced the complainant to part overseas placement or visa services and had induced the complainant to part overseas placement or visa services and had induced the complainant to part with a substantial amount on the false promise of obtaining visas. On the with a substantial amount on the false promise of obtaining visas. On the with a substantial amount on the false promise of obtaining visas. On the with a substantial amount on the false promise of obtaining visas. On the came to be basis of the enquiry report and legal opinion, the present FIR came to be basis of the enquiry report and legal opinion, the present FIR basis of the enquiry report and legal opinion, the present FIR registered. registered.

#3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has iterated that the Learned counsel for the petitioner has iterated that the Learned counsel for the petitioner has iterated that the petitioner has been falsely implicated into the FIR in question as petitioner has been falsely implicated in dispute to the FIR in question as the dispute between the parties is essentially civil in nature arising out of a business between the parties is essentially civil in nature arising out of a business between the parties is essentially civil in nature arising out of a business between the parties is essentially civil in nature arising out of a business transaction(s) which has been given a criminal colour. transaction(s) Learned counsel has which has been given a criminal colour. Learned counsel has there has never been any dishonest intention on the part further iterated that there has never been any dishonest intention on the part there has never been any dishonest intention on the part further iterated that of the petitioner as the petitioner has made every of the petitioner efforts for processing the as the petitioner has made every efforts for processing the contended that the complainant was visa applications. It has been further contended that the complainant was contended that the complainant was visa applications. It fully aware of the risks involved in the fully aware of the risks involved in the immigration procedures and refusal of visa cannot, by itself, constitute a criminal offence. refusal of visa cannot According to constitute a criminal offence. According to learned counsel, the entire case is based on documentary evidence whic learned counsel, h are the entire case is based on documentary evidence which are already in the possession of the investigating agency. Learned counsel has already in the possession of the investigating agency. Learned counsel already in the possession of the investigating agency. Learned counsel emphasized that the instant FIR has been lodged emphasized pressure FIR has been lodged in order to exert pressure the essential ingredient of dishonest intention at the on the petitioner as the essential ingredient of dishonest intention at the the essential ingredient of dishonest intention at the on the petitioner inception is absent. It has been further contented that n inception is absent. to be has been further contented that nothing is to be CRM-M- -28594-2026 3 recovered from the petitioner and, therefore, the recovered from the petitioner and custodial interrogation is therefore, the custodial interrogation is not warranted in the factual milieu of the case in hand. not warranted in the factual has been further of the case in hand. It has been further contended that the petitioner is ready and willing contended to join the investigation and willing to join the investigation and undertakes to fully cooperate with the Investigating Agency in case s and undertakes to fully cooperate with the Investigating Agency in case and undertakes to fully cooperate with the Investigating Agency in case is enlarged on bail. On the basis of these submissions, the grant of the is enlarged on bail. On the basis of these submissions, the grant of the is enlarged on bail. On the basis of these submissions, the grant of the is enlarged on bail. On the basis of these submissions, the grant of the instant petition is entreated for. instant petition is entreated for.

#4. Per contra, learned State counsel posed the grant of learned State counsel has opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner by arguing that the offence committed by anticipatory bail to the petitioner by arguing that the offence committed by anticipatory bail to the petitioner by arguing that the offence committed by anticipatory bail to the petitioner by arguing that the offence committed by the petitioner is serious in nature. Learned State counsel has iterated that the petitioner is serious in nature. Learned State counsel has iterated that the petitioner is serious in nature. Learned State counsel has iterated that the petitioner is serious in nature. Learned State counsel has iterated that the petitioner induced the complainant and his family members to part with petitioner induced the complainant and his family members to part with induced the complainant and his family members to part with amount of money on the assurance of securing employment visas a huge amount of money on the assurance of securing employment visas amount of money on the assurance of securing employment visas amount of money on the assurance of securing employment visas abroad. According to learned State counsel, despite receiving the amount, abroad. According to learned State counsel, despite receiving the amount, abroad. According to learned State counsel, despite receiving the amount, abroad. According to learned State counsel, despite receiving the amount, neither the promised visas have been arranged nor the money has been neither the promised visas have been arranged nor the money has been neither the promised visas have been arranged nor the money has been neither the promised visas have been arranged nor the money has been police reflects that the returned. Furthermore, the enquiry conducted by the police reflects that the returned. Furthermore, the enquiry conducted by the returned. Furthermore, the enquiry conducted by the petitioner was not holding the requisite licence under the Punjab Travel petitioner was not holding the requisite licence under the Punjab Travel petitioner was not holding the requisite licence under the Punjab Travel petitioner was not holding the requisite licence under the Punjab Travel which clearly attracts the offence of cheating Professionals Regulation Act which clearly attracts the offence of cheating which clearly attracts the offence of cheating Professionals Regulation Act by deception. Moreover, the allegations disclose a well by deception. planned act of Moreover, the allegations disclose a well-planned act of cheating cheating nvolving a substantial amount and hence i nvolving a substantial amount and hence involving a substantial amount and hence the custodial the custodial the custodial Accordingly, a prayer has been made for the interrogation is necessary. Accordingly, a prayer has been made for the Accordingly, a prayer has been made for the interrogation is necessary dismissal of the instant petition. dismissal

4.1. Learned counsel appearing Learned counsel appearing Learned counsel appearing respondent No.2- respondent No.2 respondent No.2 the grant of anticipatory bail to the complainant has vociferously opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the the grant of anticipatory bail to the complainant has vociferously opposed petitioner on the ground that allegations raised against the petitioner are petitioner on the ground that allegations raised against the petitioner are petitioner on the ground that allegations raised against the petitioner are petitioner on the ground that allegations raised against the petitioner are serious in nature as she, while running an immigration consultancy business, serious in nature as she, while running an immigration consultancy business, serious in nature as she, while running an immigration consultancy business, serious in nature as she, while running an immigration consultancy business, induced the complainant to part with a huge amount i.e. ₹28,40,000/- on the on the induced the complainant to part with a huge amount i.e. induced the complainant to part with a huge amount i.e. ng United Kingdom work permit visas for his son false assurance of procuring United Kingdom work permit visas for his son ng United Kingdom work permit visas for his son false assurance of procuri CRM-M- -28594-2026 4 law. It has been further contended that despite receiving the and daughter-in-law. It has been further contended that despite receiving the law. It has been further contended that despite receiving the and daughter entire amount, the petitioner neither arranged the promised visas nor entire amount, the petitioner neither arranged the promised visas nor entire amount, the petitioner neither arranged the promised visas nor entire amount, the petitioner neither arranged the promised visas nor cordingly, a prayer has been made for the dismissal refunded the money. Accordingly, a prayer has been made for the dismissal cordingly, a prayer has been made for the dismissal refunded the money. Ac of the petition in hand. of the petition in hand.

#5. and have I have heard the learned counsel for the rival parties and have I have heard the learned counsel for the gone through the available record of the case. gone through the available record of the case. gone through the available record of the case.

#6. in the prosecution version, As per the case put forth in the prosecution version As per the case put forth bitably, serious allegations have been levelled against the petitioner. indubitably, serious allegations have been levelled against the petitioner. bitably, serious allegations have been levelled against the petitioner. bitably, serious allegations have been levelled against the petitioner. The allegations against the petitioner are that she was running an The allegations against the petitioner are that she was running an The allegations against the petitioner are that she was running an The allegations against the petitioner are that she was running an immigration consultancy and promised the complainant that she would immigration consultancy and promised the complainant that she would immigration consultancy and promised the complainant that she would immigration consultancy and promised the complainant that she would law. arrange United Kingdom work permit visas for his son and daughter-in-law. arrange United Kingdom work permit visas for his arrange United Kingdom work permit visas for his On the basis of this assurance, the petitioner On the basis of this assurance, allegedly received a total the petitioner allegedly received a total amount of ₹28,40,000/- from the complainant. amount of espite receiving the money, from the complainant. Despite receiving the money, the petitioner has failed to obtain the promised visas. the petitioner hen the failed to obtain the promised visas. Furthermore, when the demanded the return of his money, the petitioner allegedly complainant has demanded the return of his money, the petitioner allegedly demanded the return of his money, the petitioner allegedly complainant issued various various cheques towards repayment. except for one cheques towards repayment. On presentation, except for one As per the material cheque, the remaining cheques were dishonoured. As per the material cheque, the remaining cheques were dishonoured cheque, the remaining cheques were dishonoured the petitioner did not possess the placed on record before this Court, the petitioner did not possess the the petitioner did not possess the placed on record before this Co necessary licence required for carrying on the business of providing necessary licence required for carrying on the business of providing necessary licence required for carrying on the business of providing necessary licence required for carrying on the business of providing The allegations raised against the overseas visa and immigration services. The allegations raised against the overseas visa and immigration services. overseas visa and immigration services. petitioner are that she has induced the complainant to part with a subst petitioner are that she has antial induced the complainant to part with a substantial amount of money on false assurances and thereafter neither fulfilled her amount of money on false assurances and thereafter neither fulfilled her amount of money on false assurances and thereafter neither fulfilled her amount of money on false assurances and thereafter neither fulfilled her promise nor refunded the entire amount. As per stand of the State, promise nor refunded the entire amount. promise nor refunded the entire amount. intentionally cheated the complainant, misappropriated the petitioner has intentionally cheated the complainant, misappropriated the intentionally cheated the complainant, misappropriated the petitioner used wrongful financial loss to the money received from him and caused wrongful financial loss to the used wrongful financial loss to the money received from him and ca complainant by making false representations regarding the procurement of complainant by making false representations regarding the procurement of complainant by making false representations regarding the procurement of complainant by making false representations regarding the procurement of CRM-M- -28594-2026 5 At this stage, the contention that the dispute is purely civil in nature visas. At this stage, the contention that the dispute is purely civil in nature At this stage, the contention that the dispute is purely civil in nature At this stage, the contention that the dispute is purely civil in nature cannot be accepted as the allegations in the FIR cannot be accepte te that the allegations in the FIR prima facie indicate that the petitioner induced the complainant to part with a substantial amount on the petitioner induced the complainant to part with a substantial amount on the petitioner induced the complainant to part with a substantial amount on the petitioner induced the complainant to part with a substantial amount on the ground that that she could arrange an overseas work visa he could arrange an overseas work visa for his son and daughter- in-law despite the fact that she was requisite he was not holding any requisite licence for the same bsequent issuance of cheques and partial for the same. The subsequent issuance of cheques and partial bsequent issuance of cheques and partial dishonest inducement coupled repayment does not efface the allegation of dishonest inducement coupled repayment does not efface the allegation of repayment does not efface the allegation of with deception which are the core ingredient with deception of the offence under Section the core ingredients of the offence under Section 318(4) BNS. Furthermore, the argument 318(4) BNS. Furthermore, the argument that the case rests entirely that the case rests entirely on a sufficient documentary evidence and no recovery is to be effected is not a sufficient documentary evidence and no recovery is to be effected is not documentary evidence and no recovery is to be effected is not ground to grant anticipatory bail investigation is still in progress. In to grant anticipatory bail as the investigation is still in progress. In investigation is still in progress. In such circumstances, the custodial interrogation such circumstances, may be custodial interrogation of the petitioner may be necessary to ascertain the modus operandi necessary to ascertain th trace the modus operandi, identify other victims, trace the money trail and verify the role of other persons, if any. trail and verify the role of other persons, if any. vital aspect of the matter which craves Another pertinent nay vital aspect of the matter which craves vital aspect of the matter which craves attention of this Court is that the petitioner has been extended the attention of this Court is that the petitioner has been extended the attention of this Court is that the petitioner has been extended the attention of this Court is that the petitioner has been extended the f anticipatory bail by the Court below on the basis of concession of anticipatory bail by the Court below on the basis of f anticipatory bail by the Court below on the basis of concession o However, compromise having been arrived at between the parties. However, compromise having been arrived at between the parties. compromise having been arrived at between the parties. petitioner has not been able to honour the terms/conditions of the petitioner has not been able to honour the terms/conditions of the petitioner has not been able to honour the terms/conditions of the petitioner has not been able to honour the terms/conditions of the compromise ibid since the cheque(s) in question given by the peti compromise tioner since the cheque(s) in question given by the petitioner have been dishnoured on presentation. In these circumstances, the Court have been dishnoured on presentation. In these circumstances, the Court have been dishnoured on presentation. In these circumstances, the Court have been dishnoured on presentation. In these circumstances, the Court below came to the conclusion that the petitioner had not adhered to the below came to the conclusion that the petitioner had not adhered to the below came to the conclusion that the petitioner had not adhered to the below came to the conclusion that the petitioner had not adhered to the conditions of the compromise and had misused the concession extended to conditions of the compromise and had misused the concession extended to conditions of the compromise and had misused the concession extended to conditions of the compromise and had misused the concession extended to ow cancelled the concession of anticipatory her. Consequently, the Court below cancelled the concession of anticipatory ow cancelled the concession of anticipatory her. Consequently, the Court bel bail earlier granted to the petitioner. In the considered opinion of this Court, bail earlier granted to the petitioner. In the considered opinion of this Court, bail earlier granted to the petitioner. In the considered opinion of this Court, bail earlier granted to the petitioner. In the considered opinion of this Court, such conduct of the petitioner is a relevant factor which cannot be such conduct of the petitioner is a relevant factor which cannot be such conduct of the petitioner is a relevant factor which cannot be such conduct of the petitioner is a relevant factor which cannot be CRM-M- -28594-2026 6 as per the overlooked while considering the present petition. Furthermore, as per the overlooked while considering the present petition. overlooked while considering the present petition. does not have clean antecedents as s reply filed by the State, the petitioner does not have clean antecedents as reply filed by the State, the case of similar nature which reflects a pattern that is involved in one more case of similar nature which reflects a pattern that case of similar nature which reflects a pattern that is involved in The nature and gravity of the offence cannot be ignored at this stage. The nature and gravity of the offence The nature and gravity of the offence cannot be ignored at this stage. necessitate a thorough investigation, which, at this stage, cannot be necessitate a thorough investigation, which, at this stage, cannot be necessitate a thorough investigation, which, at this stage, cannot be necessitate a thorough investigation, which, at this stage, cannot be conducted without the petitioner being in custody. conducted without the Moreover, no exceptional being in custody. Moreover, no exceptional or compelling circumstance has been demonstrated which would warrant the or compelling circumstance has been demonstrated which would warrant the or compelling circumstance has been demonstrated which would warrant the or compelling circumstance has been demonstrated which would warrant the grant of anticipatory bail grant of anticipatory bail

#7. It is befitting to mention here that while adjudicating the bail It is befitting to mention here that while adjudicating the plea for anticipatory bail, the Court must meticulously evaluate several plea for anticipatory bail, the Court must meticulously evaluate several plea for anticipatory bail, the Court must meticulously evaluate several plea for anticipatory bail, the Court must meticulously evaluate several At this stage, there is no material on record to hold that pivotal factors. At this stage, there is no material on record to hold that At this stage, there is no material on record to hold that pivotal factors. prima facie case is not made out against the petitioner. prima fac The material which case is not made out against the petitioner. The material which has come on record and preliminary investigation, appear to be established a has come on record and preliminary investigation, appear to be established a has come on record and preliminary investigation, appear to be established a has come on record and preliminary investigation, appear to be established a reasonable basis for the accusations. Thus, it is not appropriate to grant reasonable basis for the accusations. Thus, it is not appropriate to grant reasonable basis for the accusations. Thus, it is not appropriate to grant reasonable basis for the accusations. Thus, it is not appropriate to grant as it would necessarily cause impediment anticipatory bail to the petitioner, as it would necessarily cause impediment as it would necessarily cause impediment anticipatory bail to the petitioner, The Court ought to reckon with the magnitude in effective investigation. The Court ought to reckon with the magnitude The Court ought to reckon with the magnitude in effective investigation. and nature of the offence; the role attributed to the accused; the need for fair and nature of the offence; the role attributed to the accused; the need for fair and nature of the offence; the role attributed to the accused; the need for fair and nature of the offence; the role attributed to the accused; the need for fair such alleged and free investigation as also the deeper and wider impact of such alleged and free investigation as also the deeper and wide and free investigation as also the deeper and wide iniquities on the society. At this stage, there is no material on record to hold iniquities on the society. At this stage, there is no material on record to hold iniquities on the society. At this stage, there is no material on record to hold iniquities on the society. At this stage, there is no material on record to hold that prima facie prima facie case is not made out against the petitioner. The material case is not made out against the petitioner. The material which has come on record and preliminary investigation, appear to be which has come on record and preliminary investigation, appear to be which has come on record and preliminary investigation, appear to be which has come on record and preliminary investigation, appear to be sonable basis for the accusations. Thus, it is not appropriate established a reasonable basis for the accusations. Thus, it is not appropriate sonable basis for the accusations. Thus, it is not appropriate established a rea to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, as it would necessarily cause to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, as it would necessarily cause to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, as it would necessarily cause to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, as it would necessarily cause impediment in effective investigation. In impediment in effective investigation. In State v. Anil Sharma, (1997) (1997) 7 SCC 187 : 1997 SCC (Cri) 1039, the Hon’ble SCC 187 : 1997 SCC (Cri) 1039 Supreme Court held as under Hon’ble Supreme Court held as under : (SCC p. 189, para 6) : (SCC p. 189, para 6) CRM-M- -28594-2026 7 “6. We find force in the submission of CBI that custodial interrogation is “6. We find force in the submission of CBI that custodial interrogation is “6. We find force in the submission of CBI that custodial interrogation is oriented than questioning a suspect who is qualitatively more elicitation-oriented than questioning a suspect who is oriented than questioning a suspect who is well-ensconced with a favourable order under of the Code. In a ensconced with a favourable order under Section 438 of the Code. In a case like this, effective interrogation of a suspected person is of tremendous case like this, effective interrogation of a suspected person is of tremendous case like this, effective interrogation of a suspected person is of tremendous and also materials which advantage in disinterring many useful informations and also materials which advantage in disinterring many useful informations would have been concealed. Success in such interrogation would elude if the would have been concealed. Success in such interrogation would elude if the would have been concealed. Success in such interrogation would elude if the suspected person knows that he is well protected and insulated by a pre- suspected person knows that he is well protected and insulated by a pre suspected person knows that he is well protected and insulated by a pre arrest bail order during the time he is interrogated. Very often interrogation arrest bail order during the time he is interrogated. Very often interrogation arrest bail order during the time he is interrogated. Very often interrogation such a condition would reduce to a mere ritual. The argument that the in such a condition would reduce to a mere ritual. The argument that the such a condition would reduce to a mere ritual. The argument that the custodial interrogation is fraught with the danger of the person being custodial interrogation is fraught with the danger of the person being custodial interrogation is fraught with the danger of the person being degree methods need not be countenanced, for, such an subjected to third-degree methods need not be countenanced, for, such an degree methods need not be countenanced, for, such an all criminal cases. The Court argument can be advanced by all accused in all criminal cases. The Court argument can be advanced by all accused in has to presume that responsible police officers would conduct themselves in has to presume that responsible police officers would conduct themselves in has to presume that responsible police officers would conduct themselves in a responsible manner and that those entrusted with the task of disinterring a responsible manner and that those entrusted with the task of disinterring a responsible manner and that those entrusted with the task of disinterring offences would not conduct themselves as offenders.” offences would not conduct themselves as offenders.

#8. In view of the gravity of the allegations the specific role ravity of the allegations, the specific role necessity of custodial interrogation for a attributed to the petitioner and the necessity of custodial interrogation for a necessity of custodial interrogation for a attributed to the this Court is of the considered opinion that fair and thorough investigation, this Court is of the considered opinion that this Court is of the considered opinion that fair and thorough investigation icipatory bail in the the petitioner does not deserve the concession of anticipatory bail in the the petitioner does not deserve the concession of ant the petitioner does not deserve the concession of ant factual milieu of the case in hand. The petition is, thus, devoid of merits and milieu of the case in hand. The petition is, thus, devoid of merits and of the case in hand. The petition is, thus, devoid of merits and is hereby dismissed. is hereby dismissed.

#9. Nothing said hereinabove shall be deemed to be an expression Nothing said hereinabove shall be deemed to be an expression Nothing said hereinabove shall be deemed to be an expression of opinion upon merits of the case/investigation. of opinion upon merits of the case/investigation. of opinion upon merits of the case/investigation.

#10. lication(s), if any, shall also stand disposed off. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed off. (SUMEET GOEL) JUDGE July 15, 202 Ajay 2026 Whether speaking/reasoned: Whether reportable: Yes/No Yes/No