Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Online)(P&H) 8897

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH

CRM-M-16612-2026

Date of decision : 02.04.2026
Date of uploading : 02.04.2026

GURWINDER SINGH ………….Petitioner
Versus
STATE OF HARYANA …….Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL

Present: Mr. Vikram Jeet Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Gurmeet Singh, AAG, Haryana.

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Vikram Jeet Singh
For the Respondents: Gurmeet Singh

The primary objective of bail is to secure the presence of the accused at trial, not to serve a punitive purpose; judicial detention pending trial should be the exception, warranted only by necessity to prevent tampering or absconding, consistent with the preservation of personal liberty.

Headnote:(A) Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 - Section 483 - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 420, 120-B - Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 - Sections 318(4), 61 - Regular bail - Cheating in the name of foreign visas - Petitioner in custody for 7 months, challan presented, charges not framed - Trial likely to take time - Antecedents of petitioner mentioned but held not sufficient to deny bail when custodial trial is not warranted - Court emphasized the principle that bail is the rule and jail is the exception unless presence is intended to be secured at trial. (Paras 1, 6, 6.1)

(B) Bail - Purpose - Liberty of the individual vs. societal interest - Bail is not punitive - Primary objective is to secure the appearance of the accused at trial - Detention pending trial should be based on necessity - Courts to be mindful of innocent until proven guilty principle. (Paras 5, 5.1, 5.2)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner sought regular bail in a criminal proceeding registered for cheating and criminal conspiracy regarding a fraudulent overseas visa arrangement. The complainant alleged an inducement of Rs 18 lakhs for a UK visa which was never processed, leading to the registration of an FIR. The petitioner contended that he had been in custody for 7 months and the trial was magisterial with no charges framed yet.

Findings of Court:
The court observed that the petitioner was in custody for over seven months and charges had not yet been framed despite the filing of the challan. It was held that continued detention was not warranted, and bail was granted subject to stringent conditions including deposit of a passport and prohibition on witness tampering.

Issues: Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail pending trial, considering the nature of allegations and the duration of pre-trial incarceration.

Ratio Decidendi: Deprivation of liberty is not punitive and must be minimized. When trial duration appears uncertain and detention is not essential for the process of justice, the court should exercise discretion to grant bail, ensuring conditions are met to protect the trial process.

Result: Petition allowed; regular bail granted.

228

---

SUMEET GOEL, J. (ORAL)

1. Present petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.113 dated 25.06.2024 under Sections 420, 120-B of the IPC (corresponding Sections 318(4), 61 of BNS), registered at Police Station Cyber Manesar, District Gurugram.

2. The case set up in the FIR in question (as set out in the present petition by the petitioner) is as follows:-

“To, Manager, Police Station Cyber Manesar, Gurugram. Sir, It is humbly submitted that I, Mohit Kumar son of Satveer Singh, am currently residing as a tenant in village Nakhadaula, Manesar. I have started business in partnership in the name and style of Ganesh Shuttering Store near Lakshmi Hotel in Nakhadaula. My wife Situ Kumar teaches and undertakes coaching/tuition for children. I saw the videos/information about travelling abroad on the social media platform Instagram page named Planetguideoverseasch and its YouTube channel where a person named Gurvinder has posted many videos about sending abroad. I was impressed by his videos. After that, my conversation started on the number shown in the videos/Instagram page. They shared with me the mobile number of a girl named Neha 9780082123/9015157439. Thereafter I had a conversation with Neha and she called me to meet her at her office SCO No. 1130, 2nd Floor, Sector 22-B, Chandigarh and said that I will arrange meeting with my boss/senior Gurvinder and Anmol. In February 2024, I went to her office in Chandigarh where I met Gurvinder, who told me that his partner Anmol resides in U.K. and we all arrange your work visa for U.K.. Gurvinder assured me that my partner Anmol after getting completed procedure within two month will send you to U.K. The deal was settled for an amount of Rs. 25 lakhs and they asked me to arrange the amount. They thereafter sought COS letter from U.K. and t asked me to deposit Rs. 12.50 lacs and for this purpose they gave me two Bank Account numbers i.e. Yes Bank A/c No. 044663300000354 IFSC YESB0000466 and ICICI Bank Account No. 370501000568 IFSC ICIC0003705. I got transferred Rs. 13 lakhs and Rs.2.50 lakhs respectively in March 2024 through my bank account number PNB A/C No. 1021000100567834 and HDFC Bank A/c No. 50100424812520 through netbanking. After this Neha told me that U.K. Govt. have changed the rules, theye will again sought COS letter from U.K. and for this purpose the deal was settled for an amount of Rs. 2.50 lakhs. I gave the said amount in cash to Neha in her office at Chandigarh. On the same day they gave me a date of 24th at VFS Chandigarh for Biometric. When I went to VFS Chandigarh on 24 May 2024, then I was told that you have no for biometrics and your COS letter is also fake. Then I went to their office and I came to know that their office is closed for the last 10-15 days. In this way, they have cheated me to the tune of Rs. 18 lakh. I used to have communication with Anmol on his mobile No. 9888901426 and Gurvinder (9417092154) and Neha (9780082123) only through WhatsApp. The Print out of whatsapp chat with Neha is attached. Please take legal action against them. SD/ Mohit Kumar Mob.No. 9050843584. Today in Police Station Cyber Manesar a c complainant from Mohit Kumar son of Satveer Singh currently a tenant of village Nakhadaula, Manesar Mob. No: 9050843584, complaint (21306240021891) dated 03.06.2024 against the fraudster in the name of sending the complainant abroad on online Instagram for arranging visa have cheated with an amount of Rs.18 lakh through online advertisement. From the perusal of substance of the complaint and the technical investigation, it is found that offence under Section 420, 120-B IPC has been committed. The above said offence under above provisions of IPC has been registered. The computerized copies of the FIR are being prepared and will be sent to the Illaqa Magistrate and higher authorities for information. A specia

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2026 Supreme(Online)(P&H) 8897

The primary objective of bail is to secure the presence of the accused at trial, not to serve a punitive purpose; judicial detention pending trial should be the exception, warranted only by necessity to prevent tampering or absconding, consistent with the preservation of personal liberty.

Cases Referred (2)