Anticipatory bail in economic offences should be exercised sparingly; custodial interrogation is essential when prima facie evidence suggests the accused's involvement and a need for further investigation to prevent the frustration of justice.

Rakesh Kainthla, Judge

1. The petitioner has filed the present petition seeking pre-arrest bail in FIR No. 205 of 2025, dated 21.11.2025, registered in Police Station Shimla West, District Shimla, H.P., for the commission of offences punishable under Section 420, 120-B and 506 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

2. It has been asserted that the informant, Jyoti Dashrath Sisodia, filed a complaint regarding the fraud of ₹28.00 lakhs. She asserted that she had deposited ₹4.00 lacs in the account of the Eagle Advisory Agency on 12.12.2023 for sending her sister abroad. However, the agency did not contact the informant. The informant was travelling from Shimla to Chandigarh on 05.11.2024, and she met Radhika alias Manju Kumari and discussed the matter with her. Radhika alias Manju assured the informant that Inderjeet Singh was posted as a sub Inspector in Police Station, Kharar, and he would assist the informant in tracing the agency. The informant contacted Inderjeet Singh and re-initiated the immigration proceedings for her sister. She deposited the money in the accounts of Radhika alias Manju Kumari and Inderjeet Singh on different occasions. They failed to honour their promise, and the informant made a complaint to the police. The police arrested Manju, and she disclosed that the real name of Inderjeet Singh was Sukhvinder Singh (petitioner), and some money was transferred into his account by Manju Kumari. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in the aforesaid FIR based on the statement made by Manju. There is no evidence against the petitioner except the statement made by the co-accused, which is inadmissible in evidence.

Hence, it was prayed that the present petition be allowed and the petitioner be released on bail.

3. The petition is opposed by filing a status report asserting that the informant wanted to send her younger sister to Canada. She had paid ₹4.00 lacs to an agent on 12.12.2023. However, the agent ran away in April 2024. The informant was travelling to Chandigarh on 05.11.2024, and she met Radhika alias Manju Kumari on the way. She revealed that she was running an NGO in Chandigarh and asked the informant about any work in Chandigarh. The informant told Radhika alias Manju Kumari about the fraud committed by the agent. Radhika told the informant that Inderjeet Singh Grewal was posted as a sub Inspector in Kharar Police Station, and he would assist the informant in recovering the amount. The informant talked to Inderjeet Singh Grewal, who told her that her sister had tried for immigration three times, nobody had visited the immigration office, and her VISA would be rejected. He assured to send the informant’s younger sister abroad and demanded ₹3-4 lakhs for this process. The informant handed over the documents and the passport to Inderjeet Singh Grewal. The informant had paid a total amount of ₹26 to ₹27 lakhs to Radhika and Inderjeet Singh Grewal between 20.11.2024 and 20.02.2025. However, the immigration process was not completed. The informant made a complaint to the police, and the police registered the FIR. The police arrested Manju, who revealed during the interrogation that the real name of Inderjeet Singh Grewal was Sukhvinder Singh (the present petitioner). She had transferred ₹12.00 lakhs in the account of Sukhvinder Singh and had paid ₹4.00 lacs to him in cash. The police found that the account in which the money was transferred belonged to the petitioner’s fa