CRM-M No.39490 of 2026 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 110 CRM-M No.39490 of 2026 Date of decision: 20.07.2026 Mandeep Kaur ... Petitioner Vs. State of Punjab ... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Present:- Mr. Sunil Toni, Advocate, for the petitioner. Ms. Ruchika Sabherwal, Sr. DAG, Punjab, for the respondent-State. ---- MANISHA BATRA, J. (Oral) 1. The instant one is the second petition as filed by the petitioner under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of anticipatory bail in case arising out of FIR No.247 dated 11.06.2025 registered under Sections 318(4), 336(3), 340(2) and 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (For short “BNS”) at Police Station City Faridkot, District Faridkot. Her previous petition bearing CRM-M-36365-2025 had been dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 08.12.2025. MANJU 2026.07.21 18:38 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order /judgment Chandigarh CRM-M No.39490 of 2026 -2- 2. The petitioner along with the co-accused Harmanpreet Singh who is her husband and Supinder Singh has been booked for commission of the aforementioned offences on the allegations of extracting a huge amount of money from the complainant and 19 other persons on the premise of issuing of holiday package for Dubai in their favour and then duping them of the same by issuing fake online tickets and misleading them with regard to hotel bookings. The petitioner is alleged to be the CEO of M/s Avidfly Vacations Pvt. Ltd. Company. 3. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that after dismissal of her previous petition, there has been change in circumstances since her husband i.e. co-accused Harmanpreet Singh has been extended benefit of regular bail. A settlement has also been arrived at between him and the victims before Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court and the matter was resolved for a sum of Rs.22,92,000/- Infact, her husband was unable to continue processing the package as the complainant and other victims had stopped making payment of balance amount of the package. She has no concern with the travel agency/company of which her husband is a director though she is CEO of the said company. There are no specific allegations against her. The ingredients for commission of subject offences are not attracted qua her. She is ready to join the investigation proceedings. Her custodial interrogation is not required. No recovery is to be effected from her. It is, therefore, argued that the petition deserves to be allowed. MANJU 2026.07.21 18:38 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order /judgment Chandigarh CRM-M No.39490 of 2026 -3- 4. Notice of motion. 5. Ms. Ruchika Sabherwal, Sr. DAG, Punjab has advance notice of the petition and is ready to argue the matter. It is submitted by her that the petition is not maintainable as the first anticipatory bail as filed by the petitioner had been dismissed as withdrawn on account of the fact that the petitioner had left abroad and without any instruction to her counsel. There are chances of her absconding, if extended benefit of bail. She being CEO of the company along with the co-accused was actively involved in the business in inducing the victims to part with money on the premise of arranging a tour package for Dubai for them. There is no exceptional or extraordinary circumstance to extend benefit of pre arrest bail to her. Her custodial interrogation is required for recovery of the amount in question as well as for proper investigation in the matter. It is, therefore, argued that the petition does not deserve to be allowed. 6. This Court has considered the rival submissions. 7. So far as the question of maintainability of the petition is concerned, undoubtedly, a second petition for anticipatory bail cannot be stated to be not maintainable. However, for the purpose of exercising powers for pre arrest bail, the Court has to see the nature of the accusation, the part played by the accused as well as the attendant facts and circumstances. The petitioner was admittedly CEO of the travel company in which her husband was director. Both of them are alleged to have induced the victims to part with money on the pretext of arranging a MANJU 2026.07.21 18:38 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order /judgment Chandigarh CRM-M No.39490 of 2026 -4- tour package for them for Dubai and are further alleged to have cheated them by issuing fake air tickets issued and by making fake bookings. The case is at its nascent stage. For conducting thorough investigation, her custodial interrogation is required. In case, the same is denied to the investigation agency, that shall leave many glaring loopholes and gaps, adversely affecting the investigation. Even otherwise, she has failed to make out any exceptional and extraordinary circumstance for granting pre arrest bail to her. As such, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petition does not deserve to be allowed. Accordingly, the same is dismissed. 8. It is, however, clarified that observations made hereinabove shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. (MANISHA BATRA) 20.07.2026 JUDGE manju Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No MANJU 2026.07.21 18:38 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order /judgment Chandigarh