Lakhvinder Kaur v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Sr. No.201-1 Date of Decision: 08.05.2026 LAKHVINDER KAUR

...Petitioner

Versus

STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR.

....Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANDEEP PANNU Present:- Mr. Amit Choudhary, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Hardeep Hans, AAG, Punjab.

Ms. Shivya Sehgal, Advocate for respondent No.2.

(Appeared through video conferencing).

***** MANDEEP PANNU, J. (Oral) 1.

The instant petition under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023 has been filed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in FIR No.2, dated 03.01.2026, under Sections 316(2), 338(4), 61(2) of BNS, registered at Police Station Model Town, District Police Commissionerate, Ludhiana. 2.

This Court vide order dated 27.03.2026 while issuing notice of motion, the petitioner was directed to join the investigation and a detailed order was passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court while granting interim anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

3.

Today, learned State counsel, on instructions from the Investigating Officer, submits that the petitioner has joined the investigation and is no longer required for custodial interrogation in the present case. 4.

However, learned counsel for the complainant has opposed the present petition and argued that the FIR was registered on the complaint moved by Karan Chhabra against accused Amardeep Singh and Lakhvinder Kaur, partners of M/s D-2 Global Education and Immigration, Ludhiana, alleging cheating to the tune of Rs.1.5 crore and also extending threats to implicate the complainant in a false case. It has been argued that the complainant was induced to invest money in the business of immigration of children on the assurance that the amount would be returned and an agreement in this regard was also executed. Learned counsel further submits that though a compromise was allegedly effected on 17.09.2025 and the accused persons had agreed to repay the amount in monthly instalments of Rs.10 lakh each commencing from 01.10.2025, however, no payment was made. It has further been contended that when the complainant demanded the amount, the accused persons started threatening him and even the father of accused Amardeep Singh namely Mahinder Singh was involved in the alleged cheating.

5.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record. Since the petitioner has already joined the investigation and is no longer required for custodial interrogation, and the allegations raised by the complainant are matters of evidence which would be adjudicated upon during the course of trial, no useful purpose would be served by curtailing the liberty of the petitioner at this stage.

6.

Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and the interim order dated 27.03.2026 granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner is made absolute.

7.

All pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (MANDEEP PANNU) 08.05.2026 JUDGE Anu Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No