Mani @ Mani Masih v. State Of Punjab

CRM-M-1075-2025 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M No.1075 of 2025 Date of decision : 04.08.2025 Mani @ Mani Masih ... Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab .. Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H. S. GREWAL
 Mr. S.S. Randhawa, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Gautam Thapar, Sr. DAG, Punjab.

Mr. Aazam Khan, Advocate for Mr. Ritesh Pandey, Advocate for the complainant.

*** H.S. Grewal, J. (Oral) The present petition has been filed under Section 482 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 seeking anticipatory bail in FIR No.119 dated 21.12.2024 under Sections 420, 406 of IPC registered at Police Station Sadar, Gurdaspur District Gurdaspur, Punjab. 2.

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner alongwith his coaccused has accepted Rs.2.50 lakhs on the pretext of sending abroad the complainant's son and for getting him a job there, however, instead of sending his son to Irmania, the accused-petitioner allegedly sent him to Armania on tourist visa where he did not get employment and suffered harassment for six months.

3.

Earlier, learned counsel for the petitioner had made a statement that the petitioner is willing to return the entire amount from which he resiled later on stating that it was an erroneous undertaking given by the previous counsel, Sonia Puri 2025.08.07 13:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M-1075-2025 -2and as such, the petitioner is not bound by the same. 4.

Learned counsel for the State opposes the grant of bail on the ground that the allegations made against the petitioner are grave in nature and thus, prays for dismissal of the anticipatory bail. 5.

I have heard learned counsel for both the parties and have considered the allegations made against the petitioner. Moreover, the conduct of the petitioner on the part of earlier statement made before the Court in order to secure interim bail and then resiled from the same at a later stage, is uncalled for and as such, he does not deserve the concession of anticipatory bail. 6.

In view of above, no ground is made out to grant the concession of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Therefore, the present petition stands dismissed.

(H.S. GREWAL) JUDGE August 04, 2025 Sonia Puri Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether Reportable :

Yes/No Sonia Puri 2025.08.07 13:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document