CRM-M/51299/2026 of GURMEET SINGH ALIAS GURMIT SINGH Vs STATE OF PUNJAB on 10 September 2026

CRM CRM CRM CRM-M-51299

IN THE HIG IN THE HIG IN THE HIG IN THE HIG

Gurmeet Sing State of Punja

Date of Decis Date of Decis Date of Decis Date of Decis Date of Uploa Date of Uploa Date of Uploa Date of Uploa

CORAM:

CORAM:

CORAM:

CORAM:

Present Present Present Present:

SUMEET GO SUMEET GO SUMEET GO SUMEET GO

Nagarik Sura grant of pre No.126 dated 406, 420 and

2. money, alleg settling him a

3. of the FIR i concocted, im iterated that t Learned coun 9-2026

GH COURT OF PUNJAB AND H GH COURT OF PUNJAB AND H GH COURT OF PUNJAB AND H GH COURT OF PUNJAB AND H

CRM CRM CRM CRM-M-51299

51299-2 gh @ Gurmit Singh

versus ab

sion: sion: sion: sion: September 10 September 10 September 10 September 10, 2026 , 2026 , 2026 , 2026 ading: ading: ading: ading: September September September September 11, 2026 , 2026 , 2026 , 2026 HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUME HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUME HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUME HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUME Mr. Gurjant Singh Swaich, Advo Mr. Adhiraj Singh Thind, AAG P ***** ***** ***** ***** OEL OEL OEL OEL, J. (Oral) , J. (Oral) , J. (Oral) , J. (Oral) Present petition has been filed aksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter t -arrest/anticipatory bail to the d 06.06.2026, registered for the of 120-B of IPC, 1860, at Police Sta The FIR in question pertains to f gedly committed against the com abroad. Learned counsel for the petitione itself shows that allegations lev mprobable and devoid of any me the petitioner has been falsely imp nsel has reiterated that an earlier

HARYANA ATCHANDIGARH HARYANA ATCHANDIGARH HARYANA ATCHANDIGARH HARYANA ATCHANDIGARH

....Petitioner

....Respondent EET GOEL EET GOEL EET GOEL EET GOEL cate for the petitioner. Punjab. under Section 482 of Bharatiya to be referred as ‘the BNSS’) for petitioner, in case bearing FIR ffences punishable under Sections ation Maloud, District Ludhiana. fraud involving a huge amount of mplainant on the false pretext of er has iterated that a bare perusal veled against the petitioner are erit. Learned counsel has further plicated into the FIR in question. r dispute had arisen between the r t a r R s f f l e r . e MAHAVIR SINGH 2026.09.11 10:04 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment

CRM CRM CRM CRM-M-51299

51299-2026

petitioner and the complainant with regard to payment of lease rent in respect of the land, procurement of wheat for the flour mill, payment towards dairy milk, etc., as the petitioner and the complainant’s father had been engaged in financial transactions for more than ten years. Learned counsel has further submitted that the complainant had lodged a complaint; however, the matter was compromised between the parties on 17.04.2024. It has been argued that, thereafter, the complainant submitted another complaint containing substantially similar allegations, which ultimately formed the basis for registration of the FIR in question against the petitioner and his co-accused. It has further been reiterated that the alleged transactions reflected in the petitioner’s bank account pertain to the business activities being carried out by him.

3.1. Learned counsel asserts that the custodial interrogation should not be used as a punitive measure and is justified only when absolutely necessary for the recovery of material evidence. Learned counsel has argued that nothing is to be recovered from the petitioner. Furthermore, the petitioner is ready to join the investigation and hence no useful purpose would be served by sending him behind the bars. On the aforesaid submissions, the grant of anticipatory bail is entreated for.

4. Per contra, learned State counsel has opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner by arguing that the offence committed by the petitioner is serious in nature. Learned State counsel has asserted that the petitioner has dishonestly cheated the complainant to the tune of Rs.32,00,000/- on the pretext of settling him abroad. According to learned State counsel, the offence committed by the petitioner caused substantial financial and emotional distress to the victim. Considering the seriousness of the allegations, custodial interrogation of the petitioner maybe necessary to unearth the broader MAHAVIR SINGH 2026.09.11 10:04 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment

CRM CRM CRM CRM-M-51299

51299-2026

conspiracy, identify co-accused and recover the ill-gotten money. Given the severity of the offence, there exists a substantial likelihood that the petitioner may abscond or tamper with the evidence, if she is enlarged on bail. On the strength of these submissions, dismissal of the petition in hand is entreated for.

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

6. As per the prosecution case, the allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature. From a perusal of the prosecution case, it prima facie emerges that the petitioner induced the complainant on the pretext of facilitating his settlement abroad and, on such representation, made him part with a substantial amount of money. It is further the case of the prosecution that, instead of applying for a Canadian visa, the complainant was provided a purported visa for Australia. As per prosecution case, the complainant came to know that the visa handed over to him was fake only when, upon reaching Delhi Airport, the officials prevented him from boarding the flight on account of the visa being counterfeit. Thereafter, when the complainant demanded return of his money from the petitioner, but the petitioner refused to refund the same as also threatened to kill the complainant. The allegations, prima facie, disclose a deliberate act of cheating and dishonest inducement involving a substantial amount of money.

6.1. Such offences strike at the core of public trust and reflect a disturbing trend prevalent in this region, where unscrupulous individuals posing as travel facilitators exploit the aspirations of innocent citizens seeking opportunities abroad. These fraudulent activities not only cause severe financial and emotional distress but also undermine the integrity of lawful immigration systems. Therefore, individuals involved in such organized deceit must be dealt with firmly and in accordance with the law, leaving no room for leniency. MAHAVIR SINGH 2026.09.11 10:04 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment

CRM CRM CRM CRM-M-51299

51299-2026

6.2. Furthermore, the investigating agency has sought the custodial interrogation of the petitioner for effective recovery, verification of facts, and to establish the broader conspiracy, if any, behind the occurrence. No cause nay plausible cause has been shown, at this stage, from which it can be deciphered that the petitioner has been falsely implicated into the present FIR. It goes without saying that in the instant case, the complainant has categorically stated that the petitioner had defrauded the complainant of a substantial amount under the false pretext of facilitating his legal migration to abroad, which caused severe financial and emotional distress.

7. It is befitting to mention here that while considering a plea for grant of anticipatory bail, the Court has to equilibrate between safeguarding individual rights and protecting societal interests. The Court ought to reckon with the magnitude and nature of the offence; the role attributed to the accused; the need for fair and free investigation as also the deeper and wider impact of such alleged iniquities on the society. It is imperative that every person in the Society can expect an atmosphere free from foreboding & fear of any transgression. At this stage, there is no material on record to hold that prima facie case is not made out against the petitioner. The material which has come on record and preliminary investigation appear to establish a reasonable basis for the accusations. Thus, it is not appropriate to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, as it would necessarily cause impediment in effective investigation. In State State State State v. Anil Sharma, (1997) 7 SCC 187 :1997 SCC (Cri) 1039] v. Anil Sharma, (1997) 7 SCC 187 :1997 SCC (Cri) 1039] v. Anil Sharma, (1997) 7 SCC 187 :1997 SCC (Cri) 1039] v. Anil Sharma, (1997) 7 SCC 187 :1997 SCC (Cri) 1039], the Supreme Court held as under : (SCC p. 189, para 6)

“6. We find force in the submission of CBI that custodial interrogation is qualitatively more elicitation-oriented than questioning a suspect who is well- 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 advantage in disinterring many useful informations and also materials which 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-arrest MAHAVIR SINGH 2026.09.11 10:04 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment

CRM CRM CRM CRM-M-51299

51299-2026

bail order during the time he is interrogated. Very often interrogation in such a condition would reduce to a mere ritual. The argument that the custodial interrogation is fraught with the danger of the person being subjected to third- degree methods need not be countenanced, for, such an argument can be advanced by all accused in all criminal cases. The Court has to presume that responsible police officers would conduct themselves in a responsible manner and that those entrusted with the task of disinterring offences would not conduct themselves as offenders.”

8. In view of the seriousness of the allegations, this Court finds no compelling ground to extend the benefit of discretionary relief to the petitioner. Moreover, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is necessary for an effective investigation, recover ill-gotten money& to unravel the truth. The petition is, thus, devoid of merits and is hereby dismissed dismissed dismissed dismissed.

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

10. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed off.

(SUMEET GOEL) (SUMEET GOEL) (SUMEET GOEL) (SUMEET GOEL)

JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE September 10 September 10 September 10 September 10, 2026 , 2026 , 2026 , 2026 mahavir

Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No

Whether reportable:

Yes/No MAHAVIR SINGH 2026.09.11 10:04 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/ judgment