CRM-M-45314- IN THE H SARABJIT SING 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. Mr. A Ms. H Ms. M (throu MANISHA BATR 1. The Section 483 of Bh for grant of regul registered under S at Police Station A -2025 (O&M) 1 THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB A CHANDIGARH 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. Sandeep Kumar, Advocate with Mr. Aakash Rana, Advocate for the p 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 of IPC (Sectio tion Ambala City, District Ambala. JAB AND HARYANA AT ARH CRM-M-45314-2025 (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 with r the petitioner ate for the complainant preferred by the petitioner under Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) ut of FIR No.214 dated 12.06.2024 Section 120B of IPC added later on) oner dent nder SS”) 2024 r on) AMIT SHARMA 2026.03.27 18:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-45314- 2. The a complaint submitt alongwith his wi training for IELTS and his wife Ra represented to him abroad. They ha accused Manvir Si family members f Manish Kumar an for biometrics on of Rs.10 lakhs ha 06.03.2023. Th complainant and affixed and repres of those passports more persons to t They were subject the complainant h visas in the mont informed the comp had been received was given to them in favour of 04 pe -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. to him that he was engaged in the ey had shared their contact number nvir Singh, the complainant sent passp bers for the purpose of issuance of v ar and his family members were sent ics on 02.03.2023. On asking of accu hs had been transferred in the bank The accused Manvir Singh als t and had shown several passports represented to him that he had got vis ssports. On being convinced, the com ns to the accused Manvir Singh for subjected to biometric tests also. On nant had sent 12 more passports to h month of March, 2023. On 03.04 e complainant that passport requests ( ceived by him and demanded his fee o them, then he informed the complain 04 persons. On that premise, he col registered on the basis of a written atbir Singh alleging therein that he running an institute for providing contact with accused Manvir Singh 023. The accused Manvir Singh in the business of sending people umbers. On being induced by the t passports of Manish Kumar and his e of visas in their favour. The said re sent by the accused Manvir Singh f accused Manvir Singh, an amount bank account by Manish Kumar on h also visited the office of the ports on which visa stickers were got visas issued in favour of holders he complainant sent passports of 04 h for the purpose of issuing visas. On inducement by Manvir Singh, ts to him for the purpose of issuing 03.04.2023 accused Manvir Singh uests (PPR) pertaining to 04 persons is fees. An amount of Rs.20 lakhs mplainant that visas had been issued he collected another amount of Rs.8 ritten at he iding ingh ingh ople the d his said ingh ount r on the were lders f 04 isas. ingh, uing ingh s lakhs sued Rs.8 AMIT SHARMA 2026.03.27 18:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-45314- lakhs from the off in favour of all tho had been issued a the complainant o the visas/tickets w the complainant w to return the mone which were dish connivance with h and his clients/cus 3. After The accused Man already confined registered against 01.04.2025. The a had induced and sending them abro passports. He also would arrange forg money from his cl petitioner who had The petitioner had abroad in order to gain. Accused P -2025 (O&M) 3 the office of the complainant. He kept all those persons whose passports had sued and extracted an amount of Rs.4 nant on that premise. However, subs kets which were shown to be affixed nant were forged and fabricated one. money, the accused Manvir Singh is dishonoured. By alleging that with his wife and brother Paramvir Sin ts/customers, he prayed for taking acti After registration of FIR, investigatio d Manvir Singh and his brother Par fined in Central Jail Patiala in conn gainst them. They were joined into The accused Manvir suffered disclosu d and allured the complainant and h m abroad and had arranged forged affi e also disclosed that it was the petiti ge forged stickers of visas on passport his clients by alluring them to send th ho had arranged forged visa stickers o er had also got issued air tickets in f rder to allure them but later on got th used Paramvir Singh @ Prince also e kept on representing that the visas rts had been sent by the complainant f Rs.49,95,000/- from the clients of r, subsequently it was revealed that ffixed on the passports of clients of one. On asking of the complainant ingh issued 05 cheques in his favour that the accused Manvir Singh in vir Singh @ Prince had cheated him ng action in the matter. stigation proceedings were initiated. er Paramvir Singh @ Prince were n connection with some other case d into investigation of this case on isclosure statement admitting that he and his clients on the premise of ed affixation of visa stickers on their petitioner who had told him that he ssports and had asked him to collect send them abroad and that it was the kers on the passports of the victims. ts in favour of the victim for travel got them cancelled for his wrongful ce also suffered similar disclosure visas inant ts of that ts of inant vour in him ated. were case e on at he e of their at he llect s the tims. ravel ngful sure AMIT SHARMA 2026.03.27 18:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-45314- statement on the Offence under Sec 4. The p with several othe 23.04.2024. On active role in hatc been receiving m collected by him sending them abr forged stickers of victims arranged recovered an amo accused Manvir S victims were sent counterfeited. Ra innocent. Investig 5. It is a falsely implicated Manvir Singh whi not named in the F petitioner. The pe amount of money not beneficiary of -2025 (O&M) 4 n the basis of which, the petitioner w er Section 120B of IPC was added. The petitioner was also lodged in Cen l other cases. He was joined into On interrogation, he suffered discl in hatching of conspiracy alongwith th ing money from the co-accused Man y him (Manvir Singh) from differen m abroad and in furtherance of thei ers of visas on passports of the vict nged issued and later on getting th n amount of Rs.50,000/- out of the nvir Singh. The copies of visas af e sent to Canadian embassy and it w d. Rajvir Kaur, wife of accused M vestigation now stands concluded. It is argued by learned counsel for t icated in this case on the basis of discl h which cannot be considered to be ad n the FIR. The complainant did not m The petitioner never came into contact oney whatsoever have been paid by ary of any transaction. The complaina oner was nominated as an accused. ed. in Central Jail, Patiala in connection into investigation of this case on disclosure statement accepting his with the co-accused and that he had d Manvir Singh @ Mani that was ifferent persons on the pretext of f their conspiracy, about arranging e victims, getting air tickets of the ting them cancelled. He also got f the money he had received from sas affixed on the passports of the nd it was confirmed that they were sed Manvir Singh was found to be l for the petitioner that he has been f disclosure statement of co-accused o be admissible in evidence. He was not make any allegation against the ontact with the complainant nor any id by the complainant to him He is plainant who was in the business of used. ction e on g his had was t of ging f the got from f the were o be been used was t the r any e is ss of AMIT SHARMA 2026.03.27 18:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-45314- immigration had e and not with him. for investigation. purpose would be denied benefit of stressed that he de 6. Per c complainant has v serious in nature Paramvir @ Princ of huge amount of on the passports o received an amoun the account of GB nature. There are extended benefit o any undue delay petition does not d 7. This C for the parties at co 8. The p accused Manvir S got transferred an -2025 (O&M) 5 had entire dealing with the co-accu h him. No recovery is to be effected ation. The subject offences are triab uld be served by detaining him in cus fit of bail due to his involvement in t he deserves to be released on bail. Per contra, learned State counsel t has vehemently argued that the allega nature as in connivance with the co Prince, the petitioner had duped the unt of money. He had arranged forge orts of the victims. He got air tickets amount of Rs.85 lakhs on different d of GB Immigration. He is involved are chances of his absconding or c nefit of bail. There is nothing on reco delay in conclusion of the trial. It s not deserve to be allowed. This Court has heard the rival submis es at considerable length. The petitioner is alleged to have hatc nvir Singh and Paramvir Singh @ Pri red an amount of Rs.85 lakhs in his b ccused Manvir Singh and Prince fected from him. He is not required e triable by Magistrate. No useful in custody anymore. He cannot be ent in other cases. It is, therefore, unsel assisted by counsel for the allegations against the petitioner are the co-accused Manvir Singh and d the complainant and other victims d forged stickers of visas of Canada, ickets issued for them cancelled. He rent dates in his bank account from volved in 25 other cases of similar g or committing similar offences, if n record to show that there would be l. It is, therefore, argued that the ubmissions made by learned counsel e hatched a conspiracy with the co- @ Prince in pursuance of which, he his bank account on the premise of rince uired seful ot be fore, the r are and tims a, . He from milar es, if ld be t the unsel - h, he se of AMIT SHARMA 2026.03.27 18:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-45314- issuing visas and p accused Manvir S duped of amount explain the transac in his bank acco allegations agains since he is shown shown to have bee in some other case 05 other criminal c to show that there material witnesses abscond or comm stated to be unfou allegations levelle his complicity in s even held guilty considered opinion bail at this stage. the petition. Acco 9. It is m the purpose of dec on the merits of th -2025 (O&M) 6 s and permanent residency in favour of nvir Singh, who was owner of GB im ount of Rs.1,59,95,000/-. The pet transaction whereby the amount of Rs account from the account of the f against him are quite serious in natu hown to be involved in 15 cases of si ve been held guilty in 04 of such case er cases. That apart as per the custod minal cases. The trial has commenced t there would be any undue delay in tnesses are yet to be examined. Th commit similar offences or intimida unfounded at this stage. Taking into levelled against the petitioner, his crim in several other cases of similar na uilty and convicted in some of suc opinion that the petitioner does not des tage. As such no compelling ground h Accordingly, the same is dismissed. It is made clear that any observation of deciding the present petition and t s of the case. vour of the victims who were sent by GB immigration. The victims were he petitioner has not been able to t of Rs.85 lakhs has been transferred the firm of the co-accused. The n nature. He is a habitual offender s of similar nature. That apart he is h cases and has also been convicted custody certificate, he is involved in enced and there is nothing on record lay in conclusion of the trial. The d. The apprehension that he may timidating the witnesses cannot be g into consideration the nature of the is criminal antecedents which show ilar nature and also that he had been of such cases, this Court is of the not deserve to be extended benefit of ound has been made out for allowing ssed. vation made herein above is only for and the same shall have no bearing nt by were le to erred The nder he is icted ed in cord The y t be f the show been f the fit of wing for aring AMIT SHARMA 2026.03.27 18:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-45314- 10. In the petitioner, it shall application seekin 11. Since any, is rendered in 27.03.2026 Amit Sharma -2025 (O&M) 7 In the event of there being any FIR t shall be open to the respondent-State seeking cancellation of bail. Since the main petition has been dism ered infructuous. (MAN Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes Whether reportable:- Yes/No y FIR/complaint lodged against the State to seek redressal by filing an dismissed, pending application, if (MANISHA BATRA) JUDGE Yes/No t the g an n, if AMIT SHARMA 2026.03.27 18:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.