IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-13604-2026 Date of decision: 02.04.2026 ASHISH ….Petitioner Versus U.T. OF CHANDIGARH ....Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL Present:- Mr. Karan Duggal, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Manish Bansal, P.P. UT Chandigarh.

..…

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.65 dated 04.06.2025 registered under Sections 318(4), 61(2) BNS at Police Station Sector 17 Central, Chandigarh (U.T.).

2. Brief facts as per the prosecution case are that the petitioner along with co-accused duped the complainant for a sum of Rs.8,30,000/- on the pretext of sending him abroad on study VISA. Hence, the present FIR.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He argued that he had never met the complainant directly and he is merely a partner in the firm and was not handling front desk operations. He argued that the money received by him from the firm’s account was in the nature of profit share. He further argues that there is no direct involvement of the petitioner as he was not involved in client dealings. He further submits that the FIR has been lodged with an ulterior motive. He argued that the entire case is documentary in nature involving bank records and financial transactions which are already in the possession of the investigating agency. He further argued that the petitioner has neither committed any embezzlement nor misappropriated any funds. He further submits that in fact, the dispute in the present case is of civil nature, which has been given criminal colour by registering the present FIR. No recovery is to be effected from the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner 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, Chandigarh, vide order dated

13.02.2026.

5. On the other hand, learned State counsel has filed the status report and has opposed the prayer of the petitioner for grant of anticipatory bail on the ground that the allegations levelled against the petitioner are serious in nature. He argued that the petitioner was specifically named in the FIR. He further argued that the petitioner along with other co-accused cheated the complainant on the pretext of sending him abroad on study VISA and as such, he is the main perpetrator of the crime. He further submits that anticipatory bail of the petitioner in another FIR was also dismissed by Co- ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 27.03.2026 passed in CRM-M- 16900-2026, clearly reflecting that the petitioner is a habitual offender. He further argued 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 recover the amount involved. Hence, he prays for dismissal of the petition.

6. Heard.

7. In the present case, the allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature. He is specifically named in the FIR. He is alleged to have cheated the complainant for a huge amount on the pretext of sending him abroad. The custodial interrogation is required to uncover the modus operandi and to recover the amount involved in the crime. While considering plea for grant of anticipatory bail, this Court is required to consider the overall nature of offence and accusations against the accused, the manner of occurrence, the gravity of offence and the potential impact of granting pre-arrest protection to the petitioner, at this stage. Granting anticipatory b