Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
SANDEEP MOUDGIL
Parvinder Kaur – Appellant
Versus
State Of Punjab – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Sandeep Moudgil, J. (Oral) -
Relief sought
The jurisdiction of this Court has been invoked under Section 482 BNSS, 2023 for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in FIR No. 16 dated 06.02.2025 (Annexure P-1) registered under Sections 318(4), 61(2) BNS and Section 13 of Punjab Travel Professional Regulation Act, 2014, Police Station Phase-11, District SAS Nagar, Mohali.
2. Prosecution story setup in the present case as per the version in the FIR as under:-
"Copy of statement, "Statement of Mamta Rani wife of late Sushil Kumar resident of House NO. 1363/3, Phase-11, Mohali, District SAS Nagar aged 45 years mobile number 8699221136, stated that I am a resident of above mentioned address and am a housewife. My husband Sushil Kumar died of Cancer in the year 2010. I have two sons. My elder son Rajeshwar aged 23 years, who is BA, works alongwith his maternal uncle Tulsi Ram on his Shoe Shop at Burail. My younger son Manav aged 20 years, who after passing 10+2 was doing B. Com. first year. That Rinku resident of Kansal, Mohali whom I met around two years ago at my friend's home, due to which I started conversation with her. we both developed sisterly relation and we started v
The court found no prima facie case for custodial interrogation against the petitioner, ruling that mere introduction to the main accused does not establish cheating.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that criminal prosecution should not be used as a means for the recovery of money, especially in cases involving illegal activities such as immigra....
The absence of evidence implicating the petitioner as a travel agent and the lack of grounds to deny bail based on the recovery of the amount in question were crucial in granting anticipatory bail.
The court considered the nature of allegations and the role attributed to the petitioner, ultimately extending the benefit of anticipatory bail to him.
The court established that involvement in serious fraudulent activities, supported by substantial evidence, is a valid ground for denying bail.
Anticipatory bail is not a right; its grant depends on the nature of accusations, potential flight risk, and ongoing investigations.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
