CRM-M/34977/2026 of KARAN SINGH Vs STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER on 10 July 2026

1. The present petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding to Section 438 Cr.P.C.) seeking the concession of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.0044 dated 30.03.2026, registered under Sections 318(4) and 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding to Sections 420 and 120-B IPC) and Section 13 of the Punjab Travel Professionals (Regulation) Act, 2014, at Police Station City Dhuri, District Sangrur.

2. Mr. Nikhil Batta, Advocate has filed power of attorney on behalf of respondent No.2. The same is taken on record.

3. The case of the prosecution is that the present FIR was registered on the complaint of Bhavjot Kaur alleging that the petitioner and co-accused are running a firm in the name and style of Dream Hub Immigration Centre at Dhuri and on the pretext of sending Satnam Singh to Singapore and Akashdeep Singh to Luxembourg on work permits, they induced the complainant to pay a total sum of 14,20,000/-. It is alleged that despite receiving the said amount along with the requisite documents, the accused failed to arrange the promised work permits, JANKI BHATT 2026.07.13 18:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh provided only a visitor visa to one beneficiary and neither refunded the amount nor fulfilled their assurance. On these allegations, the present FIR came to be registered against the petitioner and the co-accused.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and has no role in the alleged offence. However, the petitioner is ready and willing to join the investigation.

5. Learned State counsel has filed the reply by way of affidavit of Gurpreet Singh, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sub Division Dhuri, District Sangrur in the Court today and the same is taken on record. Learned State counsel as well as learned counsel for respondent No.2 have opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner on the ground of gravity of allegations. He further submits that petitioner is also involved in another case of similar nature.

6. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

7. Keeping in view the entire facts and circumstances of the case and the antecedents of the petitioner, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is necessary for thorough and effective investigation of the case. Therefore, considering the seriousness and gravity of the allegations, no exceptional or extraordinary grounds are made out for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

8. Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed.

9. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.

(H.S.GREWAL) 10.07.2026

JUDGE Janki Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No JANKI BHATT 2026.07.13 18:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh