IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANAAT CHANDIGARH Rishabh Verma ….Petitioner versus State of Punjab ….Respondent Date of Decision: February 10, 2026 Date of Uploading: February 10, 2026 CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Present:- Mr. Dhiraj Jindal, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Adhiraj Singh Thind, AAG Punjab.

*****

SUMEET GOEL, J. (ORAL)

Present petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, in case bearing FIR No.244 dated 30.12.2023, registered for the offences punishable under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short ‘IPC’) and Section 13 of the Punjab Travel Professionals (Regulation) Act, 2014, registered at Police Station City Sangrur, District Sangrur.

2. The gravamen of the FIR in question is that the complainant, namely, Sanjiv Kumar, alleged that he is employed as an agent associated with newspapers and intended to travel to Australia. His brother, Vivek Goyal, informed him that he knew a travel agent, namely Rishabh Verma (petitioner herein) of Patiala, who arranges travel abroad for individuals. Thereafter, the complainant and his brother visited Rishabh Verma (petitioner herein). During their meeting, the complainant informed him that he did not possess a passport, upon which Rishabh Verma (petitioner herein) assured him that he would arrange for the issuance of the passport. Rishabh ₹

Verma (petitioner herein) allegedly demanded a total sum of 25,00,000 for sending the complainant to Australia. Acting upon his assurance, the ₹

complainant paid 5,00,000 in March 2019 at Tehsil Gate, in front of the Bus Stand, Sangrur, in the presence of Vachan Dev. Subsequently, another ₹

sum of 9,00,000 was paid in April 2019 at the office of Rishabh Verma (petitioner herein), again in the presence of Vachan Dev. However, Rishabh Verma (petitioner herein) neither arranged the passport nor facilitated the complainant’s travel to Australia. Thereafter, a panchayat was convened on 25.07.2019, during which Rishabh Verma (petitioner herein) issued cheque ₹

No.180637 for 4,50,000 and cheque No.180638 dated 28.07.2019 for ₹

9,22,500 towards repayment. Upon presentation, both cheques were dishonoured due to insufficient funds in his account. It was also later discovered that Rishabh Verma (petitioner herein) did not possess any valid licence for sending persons abroad.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner has been falsely implicated into the FIR in question. Learned counsel has argued that from the perusal of the FIR in question, it is clear that no offence under Section 420 of IPC is made out. Learned counsel has argued that allegedly, two cheques were given by the petitioner to the complainant, but no complaint qua dishonor of said cheques has been filed by the complainant, and even, the said cheques were never presented in the Bank for encashment thereof. Learned counsel has argued that, in fact, the complainant has misused the cheques, which were issued by the petitioner to one Raj Singla in the year 2019. Learned counsel has iterated that there is huge delay of 04 years in lodging the FIR in question. Learned counsel has further argued that the dispute is civil in nature, but the complainant has given the same a criminal colour. Learned counsel has argued that the petitioner was not aware about registration of the FIR in question against him and even he was never ever served qua summons or warrants, however, vide order dated 05.07.2025 (Annexure P-2), the petitioner has been wrongly declared as proclaimed person.

3.1. Learned counsel has argued that nothing is to be recovered from the petitioner. Learned counsel has further iterated that the petitioner is ready and willing to join investigation, and no purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner behind bars. On the basis of the aforementioned submissions, grant of the instant petition is prayed for.

4. On advance service