IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision:09.07.2025 Ramandeep Kaur ... Petitioner Vs.

State of Punjab ... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Present: Mr. P.S. Hundal, Advocate for the petitioner.

...

Manisha Batra, J. (Oral).

1. The instant petition has been filed under Section 482 of the BNSS seeking grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case arising out of FIR No.48, dated 28.03.2025, under Section 318(4) of BNS (Section 61(2) of BNS added later on) and Section 24 of the Immigration Act, registered at Police Station Dasuya, District Hoshiarpur.

2. The aforementioned FIR was registered on the basis of complaint lodged by complainant – Sucha Singh alleging that accused Davinder Singh, who is husband of the present petitioner had represented to him that he was engaged in the business of sending people abroad and was duly licensed for that purpose. He had allured the complainant by saying that he could sent his wife and children abroad through a valid visa for the purpose of education or on tourist visa. Since the son of the complainant was interested in going abroad for further education, therefore, on being allured by accused Davinder Singh, the complainant asked him to make arrangement for study visa of his son. Accused Davinder Singh demanded a sum of Rs.12 lakhs for this purpose in February, 2024. On asking of the accused, he handed over the passport of his son and a sum of Rs.2 lakhs to the present petitioner and accused Davinder Singh. Nothing was done in the matter and then the accused represented to the complainant that the Government of Italy had stopped issuing visas to tourists and his son would be sent by them to United States of America but for that purpose, they asked him to incur expenses to the tune of Rs.45 lakhs. The complainant paid different amounts of money to the accused. On 11.10.2024, the petitioner and co-accused took son of the complainant along with them. Thereafter they started demanding more money. A total sum of Rs.43.55 lakhs had been paid by him. On 18.12.2024, the complainant received a audio message in the voice of his son informing that he had been abducted by a mafia and money was being demanded. When the petitioner and co-accused were contacted, then instead of giving any proper answer, they started raising demand of more money which was given. Neither the whereabouts of the son of the complainant could be known to them nor it was proved that he had reached at United States of America. The petitioner and co-accused thereafter started extending threats to them to give more money by saying that otherwise he would not be able to see the face of his son. After registration of FIR, investigation proceedings have been initiated and are underway. The husband of the petitioner has been arrested. Apprehending her arrest, the petitioner moved an application for grant of anticipatory bail which was dismissed by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hoshiarpur vide order dated 10.06.2025.

3. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that she has been falsely implicated in this case only due to the fact that she is wife of main accused Davinder Singh. She had not played any role in the entire occurrence. Vague allegations have been levelled against her. She is not the beneficiary of any amount of money. There was no inducement on her part for delivery of any property. She is ready to join investigation. Her custodial interrogation is not required. No recovery is to be effected from her. Therefore, it is urged that she deserves to be extended the benefit of pre-

arrest bail.

4. Notice of motion.

5. Ms. Himani Arora, learned AAG, Punjab has advance notice of the petition and is ready to argue the matter. It is submitted by her that there are serious allegations against the petitioner, who in connivance with co- accused Davinder Singh, who is none other than her husband had induced the complainant to part with a huge amount of money on the p