IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

207 Date of decision: 09.04.2026 Gagandeep Verma ... Petitioner Vs.

State of Punjab ... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Present:- Mr. Manhav Malhotra, Advocate, for Manit Malhotra, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. Roshandeep Singh, AAG, Punjab, for the respondent-State.

----

MANISHA BATRA, J. (Oral)

1. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner has pointed out that due to some inadvertent typing mistake in the head note of the petition, it was typed that this is 1^st petition for grant of anticipatory bail though infact it is the second petition. On his oral request, requisite correction in the head note of the petition is ordered to be made.

2. The instant one is the second petition as filed by the petitioner under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of anticipatory bail in case arising out of FIR No.115 dated 31.07.2025 registered under Sections 318(4) and 316(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (For short “BNS”) at Police Station Anandpur Sahib, District Rupnagar. His previous petition bearing CRM- M-53984-2025 had been dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated

20.11.2025.

3. Brief facts relevant for the purpose of disposal of this petition are that the aforementioned FIR was registered on the basis of statement submitted by the complainant Gurdarshan Chand alleging therein that his nephew Arpan Sud was doing IELTS course at Jhajj Immigration Consultancy and IELTS Centre operated at Village Jindwari, Nangal District Rupnagar. The accused Apaninder and his wife Amandeep Kaur who are running this consultancy services had told the nephew of the complainant that if someone was interested to go to France on work permit, they could arrange for the same. On receipt of this information, the complainant along with his cousin brother had met accused Apaninder and Amandeep Kaur, who initially represented that they could send his nephew to France on work as well as study visa but after sometime, they told that they could send him to UK. They also told the complainant that they themselves were going to UK for opening an office and would call his nephew to UK in sometime. By saying that they needed money for opening office as well as for sending his nephew there, they took an amount of Rs.4 lakhs from the family of the complainant.

After reaching UK, they got transferred an amount of Rs.65,000/- through Google Pay in their account. Subsequently also, they made the complainant to part with a huge amount of money on the premise of getting certificate of service/visa issued in favour of his nephew. The present petitioner was projected as office manager of accused Apaninder and Amandeep Kaur and on their asking, money was given by the complainant to him as well. The accused Apaninder and Amandeep Kaur went to UK on the assurance that they would arrange for calling the nephew of the complainant there but returned. Neither any visa was got issued by them in favour of his nephew nor the money given to them was returned. By alleging that the present petitioner in connivance with the co-accued had cheated the complainant/his family and had caused wrongful loss of money to them, he prayed for taking action in the matter.

4. After registration of FIR, investigation proceedings have been initiated and are underway. Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner moved an application for grant of anticiptory bail which had been dismissed by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Rupnagar vide order dated 01.09.2025.

5. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that he has been falsely implicated in this case. He was merely an employee of Jhajj Immigration Consultancy. He had received money from the complainant at the instructions of co-accused Apaninder and Amandeep Kaur. He was not beneficiary of any transaction and has not derived any wrongful gain by himself. The principal role is attributed to the co-accused and