CRM-M-22300- IN THE H RAMESH SINGH 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. N Mr. P **** MANISHA BATR 1. The Section 482 of Bh for grant of anticip registered under S (for short “BNS”) Kunjpura, District 2. The a complaint submitt -2026 (O&M) 1 THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB A CHANDIGARH INGH @ DEEP GREWAL 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 Sumit Gupta, Advocate for the pe Mr. Neeraj Poswal, AAG, Haryana Mr. Parminder Singh, Advocate for th **** BATRA, J. The instant petition has been prefe of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanh anticipatory bail in case arising out o nder Sections 316(2) and 318(4) of NS”) and Section 24 of the Immigrati istrict Karnal. The aforementioned FIR was registe ubmitted by the complainant Baljit Sin JAB AND HARYANA AT ARH CRM-M-22300-2026 (O&M) ... Petitioner ...Respondent served 06.05.2026 onounced 08.05.2026 loaded on the 08.05.2026 e judgment is dgment is Full cement of full Not applicable ANISHA BATRA the petitioner e for the complainant preferred by the petitioner under Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) out of FIR No.14 dated 13.01.2026 ) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 migration Act, 1983 at Police Station registered on the basis of a written ljit Singh alleging that the petitioner oner nder SS”) 2026 2023 ation ritten ioner AMIT SHARMA 2026.05.08 14:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-22300- had induced him to his grandson to U network abroad an permit. He had al company. He d remaining amount paper work, the co his grandson to U given a ticket for grandson of the c lakhs. When he in after when he r eliminated. The p sent to USA only would made to st amount of Rs.5 l grandson was the persons who used demanded money him, thereby maki this manner, a tot grandson was kep grandson and him complainant praye -2026 (O&M) 2 him to part with a huge amount of mo n to USA on work permit by represen oad and had sent hundreds of persons had also represented that he used to s He demanded Rs.20 lakhs in adva unt of Rs.20 lakhs is to be paid the complainant paid him Rs.20 lakhs n to USA, he was initially sent to Mus et for Netherlands and Suriname. O f the complainant was asked to give n he insisted that the above said amou he reached USA, the petitioner e The petitioner even told the complain only after receipt of sum of Rs.20 l e to stay at Suriname only. Out of f Rs.5 lakhs and then Rs.15 lakhs to as thereafter sent to Mexico and wa o used to send people through dunk oney from the grandson of the com making the complainant part with ano , a total of Rs.45 lakhs was extracted as kept in Jail and then deported to nd himself had been cheated at the t prayed for taking action in the matter t of money on the premise of sending presenting that he was having a big ersons to USA and Canada on work d to send people abroad through his n advance for visa work and the paid upon reaching America. For lakhs. However, instead of sending to Muscat and Kuwait where he was me. On reaching at Suriname, the o give the remaining sum of Rs.20 amount was agreed to be given only oner extended threats to get him plainant that his grandson would be s.20 lakhs to him and otherwise he ut of fear, the complainant gave an khs to the petitioner in cash. His nd was made to fall in the trap of dunki routes. Those persons also e complainant and started torturing ith another amount of Rs.5 lakhs. In racted from the complainant but his rted to India. By alleging that his at the hands of the petitioner, the matter. ding a big work h his the For ding was , the s.20 only im ld be se he e an His p of also uring s. In t his t his , the AMIT SHARMA 2026.05.08 14:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-22300- 3. After initiated and are u application for gra of Learned Additio 4. It is a falsely implicated which has not bee and travel agent insurance as well grandson of the c aware of the fact t border illegally an been taken by him security cheque. H through bank tran amount qua which Act have been ini lakhs is a concoct His custodial inter him. It is, therefor 5. Per co complainant has allegations agains -2026 (O&M) 3 After registration of FIR, investiga d are underway. Apprehending his a for grant of anticipatory bail which ha Additional Sessions Judge, Karnal vide It is argued by learned counsel for t ated in this case. There is delay of ot been satisfactorily explained. The agent who facilitates issuance of air s well as conveyance to the tourists v the complainant, he had facilitated fact that the grandson of the complain ally and has been taken into custody. by him from the complainant as a lo que. He has already returned a sum of k transfer and the cheque which ha which proceedings under Section 138 en initiated. The story of handing ov oncocted one without any basis. He nterrogation is not required. No re herefore, argued that the petition deserv Per contra, learned State counsel assi t has vehemently argued that the against the petitioner. The compli vestigation proceedings have been his arrest, the petitioner moved an ich has been dismissed by the Court al vide order dated 04.04.2026. l for the petitioner that he has been ay of 02 years in lodging of the FIR . The petitioner is a registered tour of air tickets, hotel booking, travel rists visiting abroad. On asking of itated air tickets only. He was not mplainant had crossed Mexico-USA dy. An amount of Rs.5 lakhs had as a loan for which he had given a sum of Rs.3 lakhs to the complainant ich had been issued for remaining n 138 of the Negotiable Instruments ing over any other amount of Rs.45 . He is ready to join investigation. No recovery is to be effected from deserves to be allowed. el assisted by learned counsel for the t there are serious and specific complicity of the petitioner stands been d an ourt been FIR tour ravel g of s not USA had en a inant ning ents s.45 tion. from r the cific tands AMIT SHARMA 2026.05.08 14:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-22300- established form complainant and s petitioner had ex misleading him on to Mexico wherei conducting proper by the petitioner a was committed, h that the petition do 6. This for the parties at co 7. The p with a sum of R However, his gran had been deported the conversation b transcript of the s crime. The alleg nascent stage. It granted in excepti safety of pre-arre knowledge. In ca Investigating Agen -2026 (O&M) 4 form the conversation which wa t and some other persons which was d extracted a sum of Rs.45 lakh him on the pretext of sending his gran wherein he was kept in custody and proper investigation in the matter and ioner and to elicit information about t tted, his custodial interrogation is requ tion does not deserve to be allowed. This Court has heard the rival submis es at considerable length. The petitioner is alleged to have ind of Rs.45 lakhs by alluring him to is grandson had been sent to Mexico ported. Such like crimes are on the r tion between the petitioner and others f the same prima facie shows the com allegations against him are serious ge. It is well settled that anticipator xceptional circumstances only as a p arrest bail would certainly not dis In case custodial interrogation of th g Agency, that shall leave many glarin h was made between him and h was recorded in the mobile. The 5 lakhs from the complainant by s grandson to USA but had sent him and was ultimately deported. For and to recover the money usurped bout the manner in which the crime is required. It is, therefore, stressed ubmissions made by learned counsel ve induced the complainant to part m to send his grandson abroad. exico, was kept confined there and n the rise. A compact disc showing others has been placed on record. A e complicity of the petitioner in the erious in nature. The case is at its ipatory bail to an accused can be as a person couched in comparative ot disclose all the facts within his of the petitioner is denied to the glaring loopholes and gaps, thereby and The t by t him For rped rime ssed unsel part road. and wing d. A n the at its n be ative n his the reby AMIT SHARMA 2026.05.08 14:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-22300- adversely effectin order of anticipa procedure of crim law that the powe in extra-ordinary taking into conside conviction may en circumstance is, h For the purpose interrogation of t discussed facts, th to be dismissed. 8. Acco 9. It is, be construed as an and shall not influ 10. Since any, is rendered in 08.05.2026 Amit Sharma -2026 (O&M) 5 ffecting the investigation. The Court ticipatory bail does not operate as f criminal cases by the trial Court. It powers for grant of pre-arrest bail ar inary and exceptional circumstances onsideration the nature of the accusati ay entail. In the instant case, no such e is, however, made out from the ple rpose of conducting thorough and p n of the petitioner is must. Taking cts, this Court is of the considered opi Accordingly the same is dismissed. It is, however, clarified that the obse d as an expression of opinion of this C t influence the outcome of the trial in a Since the main petition has been dism ered infructuous. (MAN Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes Whether reportable:- Yes/No Court is also required to see that an ate as inroad in the normal legal urt. It is well settled proposition of bail are to be exercised by the Court ances and with great caution while ccusation and the sentence which the o such exceptional or extra-ordinary the pleas as taken by the petitioner. and proper investigation custodial aking into consideration the above red opinion that the petition deserves e observations made above shall not this Court on the merits of the case ial in any manner. dismissed, pending application, if (MANISHA BATRA) JUDGE Yes/No at an legal n of ourt hile h the inary oner. odial bove erves l not case n, if AMIT SHARMA 2026.05.08 14:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.