CRM-M-38638-2025 1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 249 CRM-M-38638-2025 Date of decision: 25th July, 2025 Gagan Verma ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Present: Mr. Hakam Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Vivek Sharma, DAG, Punjab. Mr. Yagsimant Attri, Advocate for the complainant. *** MANISHA BATRA, J (ORAL):- The present petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) by the petitioner seeking grant of regular bail in case bearing FIR No. 199 dated 07.10.2024 registered under Sections 420 and 406 of IPC at Police Station City Budhlada, District Mansa. 2. The aforementioned FIR was registered on the basis of a complaint submitted by complainant Sarabjit Kaur alleging that she had appeared for an examination of PTE for the purpose of going to United Kingdom on work permit. The petitioner had also studied for this course along with her. On finding that she got good scores in the examination, he told her that he could arrange for sending her to UK on work permit, on spending a sum of Rs. 30,00,000/-. The complainant had agreed to the same. On 09.01.2024, the petitioner took the complainant to his office and on the pretext of depositing process charges, took an amount of Rs. 4,25,000/- from Parveen Sharma 2025.07.29 14:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-38638-2025 2- her in cash. She also deposited all original educational certificates, Aadhar card, PAN card and other documents with the petitioner, who assured her that her visa and work permit will be received within six months. Thereafter during the period from January 2024 to till July, 2024, the complainant transferred an amount of Rs. 23,70,000/- into the bank account of the petitioner by making different transactions, and he kept on inducing her with assurance that she would be sent abroad. However, after the expiry of the period of six months, when she asked about her visa, then he started making excuses. By alleging that he had cheated her and caused a wrongful loss to the tune of Rs. 23,70,000/- by inducing her on the pretext of getting work permit and visa issued for UK, she prayed for taking action in the matter. After registration of the FIR, investigation proceedings were initiated. The petitioner was arrested on 02.05.2025. Investigation now stands completed. 3. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that he has been falsely implicated in this case. Infact, the complainant was a student at the institute run by him for an IELTS course. She herself had expressed desire to go to the UK for employment. The petitioner had simply introduced her to a licenced immigration consultancy firm namely Victoria IELTS and Immigration Consultancy, Ludhiana (for short, ‘consultancy firm’), which was partnership concern of two persons namely Kamaljot Singh and Gurmanjeet Singh. The complainant had herself pursued and interacted with the representatives of that firm. An amount of Rs. 19,45,000/- was transferred to his bank account in good faith. The petitioner had transferred the said amount by way of bank transactions as well as in cash to the consultancy firm and later on the said consultancy firm had entered into an Parveen Sharma 2025.07.29 14:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-38638-2025 3- agreement with one Ms. Chahat, who had undertaken the responsibility to handle the issuance of the visa/work permit for the UK for the complainant. The petitioner is not a beneficiary of the transaction. He had simply introduced the complainant with the consultancy firm in good faith. He has been in custody since 02.05.2025. The subject offences are triable by a Magistrate. His further incarceration would not serve any useful purpose. It is, therefore, urged that he deserves to be released on bail. 4. Notice of motion. 5. Learned State counsel has advance notice of the petition and is ready to argue the matter. Mr. Yagsimant Attri, Advocate has put in appearance on behalf of the complainant and has filed his vakalatnama. It is argued by learned State counsel assisted by learned counsel for the complainant that there are serious and specific allegations against the petitioner who had duped the complainant of a sum of Rs. 23,70,000/- on the pretext of sending her to UK on work visa. The petitioner himself has admitted that the aforementioned amount was deposited into his bank account. His complicity in the crime has been prima facie established. There is nothing on record to show that there would be any undue delay in conclusion of the trial. Such like crimes are on the rise. It is, therefore, argued that the petition does not deserve to be allowed. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties at considerable length and have gone through the record carefully. 7. The petitioner is alleged to have induced the complainant to part with a sum of Rs. 23,70,000/- on the pretext of sending her on work visa to the United Kingdom. Admittedly, a substantial amount of money was Parveen Sharma 2025.07.29 14:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-38638-2025 4- transferred into his bank account by the complainant. Though the petitioner has taken a plea that he had given this amount of money to the firm of Kamaljot Singh and Gurmanjeet Singh and had not utilized the same, from the copy of statement of account that has been placed on record by him, this fact is not reflected. Rather it clearly appears that the petitioner, in- connivance with the partners of the consultancy firm, had extracted money from the complainant with dishonest intention. The complainant is yet to be examined. Keeping in view the gravity of the allegations as levelled against the petitioner, I am of the considered opinion that he does not deserve to be extended benefit of bail at this stage. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed. 8. It is, however, clarified that the observations made hereinabove shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. 9. Since the main petition has been dismissed, pending application, if any, is rendered infructuous. [MANISHA BATRA] JUDGE 25th July, 2025 Parveen Sharma 1. Whether speaking/ reasoned : Yes / No 2. Whether reportable : Yes / No Parveen Sharma 2025.07.29 14:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document