CRM-M-55825- IN THE H PARAMVIR SIN STATE OF HAR 1 The dat 2 The dat 3 The dat website 4 Whethe pronoun pronoun 5 The del judgme CORAM: HON Present: Mr. Ms. H Ms. M (throu MANISHA BATR 1. The Section 483 of Bh for grant of regul registered under S District Ambala. -2025 (O&M) 1 THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB A CHANDIGARH R SINGH Versus HARYANA he date when the judgment is reserved he date when the judgment is pronoun he date when the judgment is uploaded ebsite hether only operative part of the judg ronounced or whether the full judgmen ronounced he delay, if any, of the pronouncement dgment and reasons thereof. HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANIS r. S.S. Momi, Advocate for the peti Ms. Himani Arora, DAG, Haryana Ms. Manpreet Ghuman, Advocate for (through video conferencing) **** BATRA, J. The instant petition has been prefe of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanh regular bail in case arising out of F nder Sections 406, 420, 120B of IPC a bala. JAB AND HARYANA AT ARH CRM-M-55825-2025 (O&M) ... Petitioner ...Respondent served 24.03.2026 onounced 27.03.2026 loaded on the 27.03.2026 e judgment is dgment is Full cement of full Not applicable ANISHA BATRA he petitioner ate for the complainant preferred by the petitioner under Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) ut of FIR No.214 dated 12.06.2024 f IPC at Police Station Ambala City, oner dent nder SS”) 2024 City, AMIT SHARMA 2026.03.27 18:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-55825- 2. The a complaint submitt alongwith his wi training for IELTS and his wife Ra represented to him and he could arran On being induced clients to the accu favour. The accus However, it was f the passports of th favour were got ca of the accused Ma other, had duped t intent to cheat them 3. After The petitioner and Jail, Patiala in c investigation of t disclosure stateme name of Sarabjit Similar disclosure recovered an amo -2025 (O&M) 2 The aforementioned FIR was registe ubmitted by the complainant Satbir S is wife Akwinder Kaur was runnin IELTS classes. He came into contac fe Rajvir Kaur in January, 2023. him that he was engaged in the busi d arrange for issuance of visas and per nduced by him, the complainant sen e accused Manvir Singh for the purpo accused Manvir Singh extracted huge was found that forged and fake visa ts of the victims and even the air tick got cancelled. By alleging that the pr ed Manvir Singh and his wife Rajvir uped the complainant and his clients o at them, he prayed for taking action in After registration of FIR, investigatio er and co-accused Manvir Singh were in connection with some other ca n of this case on 01.04.2025. Acc tatement admitting his involvement i rabjit Singh Sandhu who was nom losure statement was suffered by th n amount of Rs.10,000/- out of the m registered on the basis of a written atbir Singh alleging therein that he running an institute for providing ontact with accused Manvir Singh 023. The accused Manvir Singh business of sending people abroad nd permanent residency for Canada. nt sent passports of several of his purpose of issuance of visas in their d huge amount of money from them. e visas stickers were got affixed on ir tickets which were issued in their the present petitioner who is brother ajvir Kaur in connivance with each ients of huge amount of money with tion in the matter. stigation proceedings were initiated. h were found to be lodged in Central her case. They were joined into Accused Manvir Singh suffered ent in the crime and also took the s nominated as additional accused. by the present petitioner, who got f the money which he had received ritten at he iding ingh ingh road nada. his their hem. d on their er each with ated. ntral into fered k the . got ived AMIT SHARMA 2026.03.27 18:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-55825- from accused Ma concluded. 4. It is falsely implicated Singh. He has no brother Manvir Si the co-accused can material to show t induced the comp them at any poin unsubstantiated an with the co-accus long. In fact, it is entire crime and incarceration is n submissions, it is u 5. Per c complainant has allegations agains duped the victims involved in sever committing simila that the petition do -2025 (O&M) 3 ed Manvir Singh in his bank accoun It is argued by learned counsel for t icated in this case only due to being b has nothing to do with the immigratio vir Singh. The disclosure statement sed cannot be considered to be admiss show that any money was transferred complainant or any other victim nor y point of time. Allegations agains ted and have been levelled only on a accused Manvir Singh who is his br t, it is accused Sarabjit Singh Sandhu e and the petitioner had no link n is not going to serve any useful , it is urged that the petition deserves t Per contra, learned State counsel t has vehemently argued that the against the petitioner who in conniva ictims of huge amount of money. He several other cases. There are ch similar offences, if extended benefit o tion does not deserve to be allowed. account. Investigation now stands l for the petitioner that he has been being brother of the accused Manvir igration consultancy business of his ment allegedly suffered by him and admissible in evidence. There is no ferred in his bank account. He nave m nor had any communication with against him are totally vague and y on account of his being associated his brother. He is in custody since andhu who is the master-mind of the link with him. His continued useful purpose. With these broad erves to be allowed. unsel assisted by counsel for the t there are serious and specific onnivance with the co-accused had ey. He is a habitual offender and is are chances of his absconding or nefit of bail. It is, therefore, argued tands been anvir f his and is no nave with and iated since f the nued road the cific had nd is g or gued AMIT SHARMA 2026.03.27 18:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-55825- 6. This C for the parties at co 7. The p the complainant a named in the FIR had made any ind time. It is a matte the commission 01.04.2025. Tria extended benefit o consideration the that no useful pur anymore. As such this stage. Accord be released on bai the satisfaction o Magistrate concern 8. It is m the purpose of dec on the merits of th 9. In the petitioner, it shall application seekin -2025 (O&M) 4 This Court has heard the rival submis es at considerable length. The petitioner alongwith the co-accu nant and other victims of huge amou e FIR, however, there appears to be ny inducement to the complainant and matter of evidence as to whether he ssion of the subject offences. He Trial will take considerable time nefit of bail in other cases as registe n the above discussed facts, this Cour ul purpose would be served by detai s such a case has been made out for g ccordingly, the petitioner is allowed a on bail subject to his furnishing perso tion of the learned Trial Court/Ch oncerned. It is made clear that any observation of deciding the present petition and t the case. In the event of there being any FIR t shall be open to the respondent-State seeking cancellation of bail. ubmissions made by learned counsel accused is alleged to have duped amount of money. Though he was to be no specific allegations that he nt and other victims at any point of er he was one of the conspirators in . He has been in custody since time to conclude. He has been registered against him. Taking into s Court is of the considered opinion detaining the petitioner in custody t for grant of bail to the petitioner at owed and the petitioner is ordered to personal as well as surety bonds to urt/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty vation made herein above is only for and the same shall have no bearing y FIR/complaint lodged against the State to seek redressal by filing an unsel uped was at he nt of rs in since been into inion tody er at ed to ds to Duty for aring t the g an AMIT SHARMA 2026.03.27 18:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-55825- 10. Since any, is rendered in 27.03.2026 Amit Sharma -2025 (O&M) 5 Since the main petition has been all ered infructuous. (MAN Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes Whether reportable:- Yes/No allowed, pending application, if (MANISHA BATRA) JUDGE Yes/No n, if AMIT SHARMA 2026.03.27 18:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.