Custodial interrogation is essential for effective investigation in serious financial offences, particularly where the accused is a primary participant. Granting pre-arrest protection in such cases would hinder the recovery of misappropriated funds and the discovery of the conspiracy, thus necessitating the denial of such relief.

JUDGMENT :

RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL, J.

1. Prayer in the present petition filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.93 dated 03.03.2026 registered under Sections 120-B and 420 IPC, at Police Station Krishna Gate, Thanesar, District Kurukshetra.

2. Brief facts as per the prosecution case are that the petitioner in connivance with co-accused, cheated the complainant for a sum of Rs.31,90,000/- on the pretext of sending his son abroad on PR visa.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He argued that the petitioner is neither beneficiary of the alleged fraud, nor has any concern with the said offence. He argued that in fact, an agreement was executed between the complainant and the petitioner wherein it was mentioned that the petitioner will only assist the complainant to send his son abroad. He further argued that an amount of Rs.16,90,000/- was transferred in the account of the petitioner out of which, he duly transferred Rs.14,22,000/- in the account of B.G. Immigration Patiala, further an amount of Rs.75,000/- was sent back to the complainant and Rs.58,000/- was handed over to son of the complainant and thus, he has transferred Rs.15,55,000/- in total out of Rs.16,90,000/-. He further argued that the petitioner is still ready to pay the remaining outstanding amount of Rs.1,35,000/-. He further submitted that the entire case is based on documentary evidence which are already in possession of the complainant or the investigating agency, hence, nothing is to be recovered from the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to join the investigation as and when called upon to do so by the investigating agency. Hence, he prays that present petition be allowed.

4. After registration of the FIR, investigation has been initiated and is under way. Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner had moved an application for grant of anticipatory bail which has been dismissed by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kurukshetra, vide order dated 13.03.2026.

5. On the other hand, learned State counsel has filed the status report in the matter, which is taken on record and while referring to the same, she has vehemently opposed the prayer of the petitioner for grant of anticipatory bail on the ground that the allegations levelled against the petitioner are serious in nature. She argued that the petitioner is specifically named in the FIR. She further argued that the petitioner in connivance with co-accused, dishonestly induced the complainant to part with huge amount of money on the false assurance of sending his son abroad. She further argued that the petitioner has allegedly taken Rs.31,90,000/- from the complainant’s son for sending him to Canada. She further submitted that Rs.16,90,000/- was transferred in the account of the petitioner’s firm namely Pawan Dev Digital World, whereas a sum of Rs.15,00,000/- was given in cash to the petitioner. She further submitted that the petitioner is not only peripheral participant but principal architect of the conspiracy. He along with co-accused orchestrated a well planned conspiracy to cheat the complainant. Moreover, the petitioner has himself executed an ‘affidavit of undertaking and refund commitment’ dated 4.10.2025 to refund the complete amount of Rs.31,90,000/- as per the terms of the said affidavit. She further submitted that the petitioner is involved in one more case meaning thereby he is a habitual offender. She further submitted that the custodial