129 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Decided on: 13.02.2026 Anudeep Kumar ..... Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others ......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ Present: Mr. Mohd. Akbar Khan, Advocate, Mr. Shashi Kant Updhyay, Advocate and Mr. Md. Adnam Afsar, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. Sumit Jain, Addl. AG, Haryana.

Rajesh Bhardwaj, J.

1. Prayer in the present petition, filed under Section 528 BNSS, is for quashing of FIR No.229, dated 13.06.2024, registered under Sections 406, 420 IPC, at Pundri Police Station, District Kaithal as well as all the consequent proceedings arising out therefrom.

2. Succinctly facts of the case are that the FIR in the present case was lodged on the statement of Amrit Kaur wife of Ravi Kumar. It was alleged that the complainant and her husband intended to go abroad and, in that regard, they came into contact with Anudeep Kumar (the petitioner) through a close relative of the complainant itself, who had earlier been sent abroad by the petitioner. In March 2023, the complainant and her husband met the petitioner, and a deal was finalized for a total sum of Rs.32 lacs for arranging a Canada work visa. The petitioner assured them that the visa would be provided within 45 days. Thereafter, the complainant and her husband provided him all their documents including PAN Card, Aadhaar Card, Passport and Voter ID Card to the petitioner-accused. The petitioner told them that he would first send the complainant’s husband abroad and within 45 days thereafter, he would sent the complainant as well. Accordingly, medical examination of the husband of the complainant was got done and thereafter, arranged for his CELPIP test. For the purpose, he took Rs.1,40,000/- in cash from the complainant’s husband. However, lateron, the petitioner informed the complainant’s husband that his visa had been rejected on the ground that he failed the CELPIP test. Thereafter, the complainant contacted the petitioner over the phone and asked for a refund of the amount paid. However, the petitioner allegedly misled them again and assured that he would arrange visas for both of them. Subsequently, the complainant and her husband paid a total sum of Rs.26,60,000/- to the petitioner-accused on various dates. Despite receiving the said amount, neither the visas were arranged for the complainant and her husband, nor the money was refunded. Despite repeated attempts, the complaint could not contact the accused. Consequently, the complainant realized that they had been cheated by the petitioner. Thus, prayer for taking legal action has been made and the present FIR was lodged. On the registration of the FIR, the investigation commenced. Hence, the petitioner approached this Court praying for quashing of the FIR.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently contended that the petitioner has been falsely prosecuted in the impugned FIR. He submits that respondent No.2 i.e. the complainant and respondent No.3 i.e. husband of the complainant, approached the petitioner in March 2023 for consultancy services to obtain a Canadian work visa and it was clearly disclosed at the outset that the visa process was subject to eligibility criteria prescribed by the Canadian authorities, including medical fitness and qualifying English language proficiency tests, and no guarantee of visa could be given. He submits that the petitioner duly initiated the process and both the respondents underwent medical examinations and appeared for the CELPIP test but failed to qualify. It is submitted that the visa could not be processed further solely on account of their failure to meet the statutory requirements. He submits that during the process, a total sum of Rs.18,50,000/- was paid towards professional consultancy services by the respondents. It is submitted that the allegation of payment of Rs.26,60,000/- is false and unsupported by any documentary evidence and the impugned FIR and the police report contain m