IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 13.11.2025 Kuldeep Singh ....Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ....Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL Present: Mr. Manjinder Singh Saini, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Ravinder Singh, DAG, Punjab.

Mr. Nitin Verma, Advocate for the complainant.

*****

RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL, J (ORAL)

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.75 dated 13.09.2025 registered under Sections 406, 420, 120-B of IPC and Section 24 of the Immigration Act, at Police Station City Kurali, District SAS Nagar.

2. Brief facts as per the prosecution case are that the petitioner along with two other co-accused duped the complainant of Rs.5 lakhs under the pretext of sending him abroad and gave him fake visa and air tickets.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He argues that even as per FIR, no direct allegations have been levelled against the petitioner. He further submits that the petitioner has no concern or connection with the company “Rana Associates” and in fact, he himself is a victim of crime at the hands of other co-accused. He further argues that the petitioner himself had approached the co-accused Manjit Singh and Surinder Singh through Facebook and showed interest in going abroad. He argues that no amount was ever transferred in the account of the petitioner directly and the mobile number registered with the relevant bank account does not belong to the petitioner. He further submits that the petitioner never met the complainant and rather, it was Manjit Singh who introduced himself as Kuldeep Singh (petitioner) to the complainant. He further argues that the petitioner was never served with any notice under Section 35 of the BNSS to join investigation. No recovery is to be effected from the petitioner. Moreover, the petitioner has clean antecedents as he is not involved in any other case. Learned counsel 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.

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

14.10.2025.

5. On the other hand, learned State counsel, has already filed the status report in the matter and while referring to the same, has opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail on the ground that the allegations levelled against the petitioner are serious in nature. He argues that the petitioner is specifically named in the FIR. The petitioner, along with co- accused, cheated and defrauded the complainant of Rs.5,00,000/-. He further argues that during investigation on 02.10.2025, the petitioner along with other accused persons were issued notices under Section 35 of the BNSS to join the investigation but they never joined. He has further submitted that during investigation, it was found that the petitioner was one of the proprietors of “Rana Associate”, in whose bank account, the complainant deposited Rs.2,50,000/-, which itself shows the involvement of the petitioner in duping the complainant in the name of sending him abroad. He further submits 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 effect recovery of the amount involved in the alleged fraud. Hence, he prays for dismissal of the petition.

6. Heard.

7. In the present case, the petitioner is specifically named in the FIR and the allegations against him are serious in nature. He is alleged to have cheated and defrauded the complainant of Rs.5,00,000/- under the pretext of s