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.42 dated 11.04.2025 registered under Sections 318(4), 338, 336, 336(2), 340 and 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (Sections 338, 336, 336(2) and 340 of BNS deleted later on), at Police Station Lalru, District SAS Nagar (Mohali).

2. Brief facts of the prosecution case are that the petitioner along with co-accused were indulged in cheating innocent people on the pretext of sex-determination and in that regard, prepared forged documents. Hence, the present FIR.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and she has no concern or involvement with the alleged offence. He argued that the alleged raid was conducted on 20.03.2025 but the FIR in question was registered on 11.04.2025 i.e. after a delay of 20 days, casting serious doubt on the prosecution story. He argued that the petitioner is a house-wife and had given some portion of her house on rent to other co-accused for earning her livelihood and has no other connection with the said co-accused persons. He further argued that at the time the raid was conducted, co-accused Rahul Kumar (tenant of the petitioner) had transferred Rs.20,000/- as rent from another person's account to her account and therefore, the amount cannot be linked with the offence. He further argued that if the contents of the FIR are taken to be true, even then no ultrasound machine was found at the house of the petitioner during the raid and therefore, the allegations of charging huge amount of money for sex determination is totally false and frivolous. Further, co-accused Rahul Kumar has already been granted the concession of regular bail by this Court, vide order dated 18.11.2025. Moreover, the petitioner has clean antecedents as she is not involved in any other case and nothing is to be recovered from her. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits 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, SAS Nagar, vide order dated 11.11.2025.

5. On the other hand, learned State counsel has already filed the status report in the matter and while referring to the same, he has 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. He argued that the petitioner is specifically named in the FIR. He further argued that the petitioner in connivance with other co-accused has cheated and defrauded innocent people on the pretext of illegal sex determination of fetus and received Rs.20,000/- as an advance from decoy customer, through UPI transaction out of the demanded amount of Rs.80,000/-. He further argued that the house of the petitioner was used for sex determination of fetus, from where the petitioner along with co-accused Rahul and Nitesh were apprehended along with a laptop, a stethoscope, one gel tube and Rs.60,000/-. He 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 innocent people. He further submitted that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required for a fair and proper investigation in the matter as well as to unearth the modus operandi of accused; and to recover the amount involved in the alleged fraud. Hence, he prays for dismissal of the petition.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused th