Payal Chawla v. State Of Punjab
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M- 32987-2025 PAYAL CHAWLA ......Petitioner
Versus
STATE OF PUNJAB ......Respondent CRM-M- 33008-2025 ANCHAL CHAWLA ......Petitioner
Versus
STATE OF PUNJAB ......Respondent Decided on:
25.03.2026
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH
Present:
Mr. Ujwal Anand, Advocate, and Mr. Aryan Singh, Advocate, for the petitioners (in both the cases).
Mr. Neeraj Madaan, Sr. DAG, Punjab.
**** SANJAY VASHISTH, J.
1.
By this common order, both the aforementioned petitions, i.e. CRM-M-32987-2025 and CRM-M-33008-2025 stand disposed of. 2.
Present petitions have been filed by the petitioners, seeking grant of anticipatory bail, in case bearing FIR No.0108, dated 24.04.2025, under Section(s) 406, 420, 120-B of IPC, registered at Police Station Phase 1, District SAS Nagar (Mohali).
3.
On 23.06.2025, following order was passed in both the present petitions:- "2.
Counsel for the petitioners contends that there being no active role having been attributed against the petitioners, they have been falsely involved as
accused in the present case only with a purpose to harass and humiliate along with all the family members, including the female family members.
3.
As per the allegations, complainant was deprived of receiving of the agreed amount paid by the clients, i.e., more than 1 lakh USD (approximately Rs.87.00 lacs). Bank account in the name of Vibe Solutions INC was opened and operated separately by Anchal Chawla (petitioner in CRM-M-33008-2025), Akash Singh and Payal Chawla (petitioner in CRM-M32987-2025) and they had no direct nexus to operate the said Bank account.
4.
Further submits that there being no specific role in the FIR against the petitioners, rather, the agreement, so relied upon by the complainant, is signed only by one party, i.e., Vibe Solutions through its sole proprietor, which is also not valid and concluded contract (Annexure P-2). Maximum, it can be alleged against the accused that the amount received from the clients, has not been shared and paid to the complainant, as agreed between the parties before starting of the business.
5.
It is also contended that out of an amount of USD 2,00,000/- (approximately Rs.1,73,00,000/-) has been allegedly received in the account of Vibe Solutions and an amount of USD 81,000/- has already been paid in the account of Truckstop 40 LLC (partner company of the complainant in USA) as well as Supermove Logistics.
6.
Counsel for the petitioners also submits that nothing is due to be recovered from the petitioners and at the most, dispute can be termed to be of monetary nature only, arising from the business deals between the parties. Thus, there being no criminality involved, respective petitioners (in both aforementioned petitions) pray for grant of anticipatory bail.
7.
Counsel for the petitioner(s) also submits that dispute has now been resolved for the specific amount also, by way of executing a notarized compromise deed dated 19.06.2025, and as a result thereof, two of the accused namely Abhishek Chawla and Akash Sharma have been granted the concession of regular bail.
Copy of the compromise deed and the bail orders dated 19.06.2025 are produced before this Court today, and same are ordered to be taken on record. 8.
Notice of motion.
9.
On advance notice, Mr. Manjinder Singh Bhullar, DAG, Punjab, puts in appearance on behalf of the respondent - State, and seeks some time to file status report in both the cases.
10.
Adjourned to 09.09.2025.
11.
In the meanwhile, the petitioners (in both the petitions) are directed to join the investigation as and when required to do so by the Investigating Agency. In the event of their arrest, the petitioners shall be released on ad-interim bail, subject to their furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer. The petitioners shall also be abide by all the conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.).
12.
Besides, it is directed that petitioners would hand over their passport to the Investigating Agency or to Court concerned, if they possess. Otherwise, would submit an affidavit, disclosing the fact that they do not possess any passport.
It is also directed that before leaving country any time during trial, petitioner would seek prior permission of the Court.
13.
A photocopy of this order be placed on the file of other connected case."
4.
Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the entire disputed amount has already been paid back by the petitioners to the complainant/victim, and a settlement has been arrived at between the parties.
5.
It is further submitted that a petition for quashing on the basis of compromise, bearing No.CRM-M-59400-2025, was earlier filed by the accused persons. However, vide order dated 22.01.2026, the same was dismissed as withdrawn, at that stage, on account of failure of the petitioners therein to procure the presence of the complainant, with liberty to file a fresh petition.
6.
Learned counsel for the petitioners further contends that in compliance of the order dated 23.06.2025 passed by this Court, petitioners have joined the investigation, and have fully co-operated. Therefore, he prays for confirmation of the said interim anticipatory bail order.
7.
On the other hand, learned State counsel has filed status reports dated 24.03.2026 in both the cases, in the Court today and the same are taken on record. Registry is directed to tag the same at the appropriate place on the file.
8.
Learned State counsel on instructions, confirms the said averment made by counsel for the petitioners of joining the investigation by the petitioners on 10.03.2026, and submits that they have also produced their respective passports, which were taken into police possession, in accordance with law.
9.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
10.
Since, petitioners have already joined the investigation and passports in that regard have already been submitted; ad-interim bail order dated 23.06.2025 passed by this Court is hereby made absolute. Accordingly, present petitions are allowed.
However, petitioners shall continue to join the investigation as and when required to do so and abide by all the terms and conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023. 11.
Accordingly, both the petitions stand disposed of. 12.
A photocopy of this order be placed on the file of other connected case.
(SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE 25.03.2026 Lavisha Whether Speaking/Reasoned:
YES/NO Whether Reportable:
YES/NO