IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: 31.10.2025 Harpreet Singh @ Sabi ....Petitioner V/s State of Punjab ....Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Present: Mr. Avtar S. Khinda, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Amit Kumar Goyal, Addl. AG, Punjab.

Mr. APS Rehan, Advocate for the complainant.

*****

SUMEET GOEL, J.

1. Present petition has been filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter to be referred as ‘the BNSS’) seeking grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR No.251 dated 15.09.2025, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 406, 34 of IPC and Section 24 of the Immigration Act, 1983, at Police Station Dinanagar, District Gurdaspur.

2. The gravamen of the FIR in question pertains to defrauding the complainant- Rakesh Kumar, son of Amarnath, resident of Gurdaspur. In the complaint submitted by the complainant, it has been alleged that one Paramjit Singh, a travel agent, in connivance with the petitioner (herein), ₹

cheated him for a sum of 20,03,000/- on the pretext of sending him to New Zealand on a work permit visa. The said amount was allegedly paid to the accused in installments between 09.09.2024 and 08.01.2025. Out of the total ₹

amount, a sum of 3,86,000/- was transferred to the bank account of accused ₹

Paramjit Singh, while 16,17,000/- was paid in cash to both Paramjit Singh and the petitioner (herein). It is further alleged that after receiving the money, the accused repeatedly booked and cancelled air tickets for Canada on 20.02.2025, 10.03.2025, 09.04.2025, and 30.05.2025. It is also alleged that the travel agency operated by the petitioner under the name “Sekhon Tour and Travel” is neither registered nor licensed. On the basis of these allegations, the present FIR under Sections 420, 34 of IPC and Section 24 of the Immigration Act, 1983 was registered against the petitioner and his co-

accused.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has iterated that the petitioner is an innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel asserts that the allegations levelled against the petitioner in the impugned FIR are entirely baseless and devoid of any credible or cogent material. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further argued that the complainant has levelled specific allegations only against co-accused Paramjit Singh, who is stated to be working as a travel agent. It has been further argued that the complainant has alleged that Paramjit Singh received the entire amount from him and even issued cheques as security towards repayment. It is submitted that there are no allegations in the FIR that the petitioner ever received any amount from the complainant or that he made any assurance or inducement to send the complainant abroad. It is further contended that as per the allegations in the FIR, co-accused Paramjit Singh had executed a written affidavit in favour of the complainant, acknowledging receipt of the money and undertaking to return the same by 01.05.2025, failing which the complainant could initiate appropriate legal proceedings against him. A copy of the said affidavit dated 23.04.2025 has been placed on record as Annexure P-2. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner has been nominated in the FIR merely on the basis of his statement recorded during the preliminary inquiry, wherein he had admitted to having received some money from the main accused Paramjit Singh. It is, however, clarified that the said amount was borrowed by the petitioner from Paramjit Singh for his personal domestic needs, and the same has already been repaid through banking transactions from the accounts of the petitioner and his mother, Balwinder Kaur. Copies of the relevant bank statements have been annexed with the petition in support of this contention. According to learned counsel, the petitioner is neither a travel agent nor engaged in any business of facilitating overseas employm