Kulwant Singh v. State Of Haryana
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH DECIDED ON: 16.03.2026 KULWANT SINGH .....PETITIONER
VERSUS
STATE OF HARYANA .....RESPONDENT
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH.
Present:
Mr. Anil Mehta, Advocate, and Mr. Kartik Mehla, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. Kanwar Sanjiv Kumar, AAG, Haryana.
SANJAY VASHISTH , J (ORAL) CRM-10075-2026 1.
Present application has been moved by the applicant/petitioner for placing on record copy of email communications showing visa application processing from year 2020 to 2026 as Annexure P-7.
2.
Notice in the application.
On advance notice, Mr. Kanwar Sanjiv Kumar, AAG, Haryana, puts an appearance on behalf of the respondent/State, and raises no serious objection, if prayer made in the present application, is allowed. Considering the averments mentioned in the application, prayer made in the application is allowed and copy of email communications showing visa application processing from year 2020 to 2026, is ordered to be taken on record, as Annexure P-7. Registry is directed to tag the same at the appropriate place on the file.
5.
CM stands disposed of.
CRM-M-34484-2025 1.
Present petition has been filed by the petitioner, seeking grant of anticipatory bail, in case, FIR No.78, dated 16.04.2025, under Sections 152, 318(4), 336(3), 338, 340, 61 of BNS (Section 152 of BNS omitted later on), registered at Police Station City Ratia, District Fatehabad, and for setting aside of the order dated 28.05.2025 (Annexure P-3) passed by the Court of learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fatehabad, whereby bail application filed by the petitioner, was dismissed. 2.
After hearing the submissions addressed by counsel for the petitioner, on 04.07.2025, following order was passed:- "2.
Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia contends, that even if the allegations are assumed to be true, it cannot be said that petitioner has committed any offence. Even no one is cheated upon or deceived by the petitioner because of obtainig a fake degree from some agency and then, using the same somewhere else i.e. outside the country. Further, it is submitted that candidates are forwarded to the petitioner's firm by agencies, that assures unemployed individuals of job placements, after collecting their educational documents. Role of the petitioner's firm is limited of processing visas based on the documents already provided by these agencies. Additionally, petitioner expresses his willingness to join the investigation and fully cooperate, if he is protected from arrest by this Court. Thus, prays for grant of concession of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in the present case.
Notice of motion.
5.
On advance notice, Mr. Kanwar Sanjiv Kumar, AAG, Haryana, puts in appearance on behalf of the respondent - State, and seeks some time to file status report in the matter.
6.
Adjourned to 22.07.2025, to enable learned State counsel to file status report in the matter. 7.
Till the next date of hearing, petitioner shall not be arrested. However, issue of joining of investigation of the petitioner would be examined on the next date of hearing, after reviewing the status
report which is yet to be filed by learned State counsel."
Thereafter, on 26.02.2026, following order was passed by the Court:- "To demonstrate the position whether the firm run by the petitioner under the name of 'K.V. Oxford' is functional since last several years, and has been dealing with the process of visa application for number of candidates, prior to the registration of FIR, learned counsel for the petitioner(s) seeks some time. List again on 05.03.2026.
Interim order to continue till then.
Photocopy of this order be placed on the file of other connected case."
Today, counsel for the petitioner has placed on record certain emails addressed by various companies/firms to the petitioner-firm, indicating that documents were appended with the said emails and requesting the petitioner to process visa applications.
5.
Despite repeated queries by the Court, learned State counsel was unable to point out any material available against the petitioner, at this stage. However, he submits that investigation is still in progress, and WhatsApp chats between the main accused-Mahender Singh, who runs an immigration firm, and the petitioner have been sent to the FSL, for verification of their authenticity, and the report is still awaited. 6.
It is informed that co-accused namely Mahender Singh has already been arrested by the investigating officer, during the course of investigation and has subsequently been granted regular bail. 7.
Despite being asked repeatedly, investigating officer, namely SI Harminder Singh, who is present in Court, could not point out any other instance recorded in the past against the petitioner, alleging his involvement in the preparation of forged documents/degrees for sending candidates abroad.
8.
In view of the above, this Court is of the opinion that the matter requires thorough investigation; however, custodial interrogation of the petitioner does not appear to be necessary for the said purpose, subject to the extending of full cooperation by the petitioner to the investigating officer, whenever required.
9.
In view of the factual aspects recorded here above, present petition is allowed. Accordingly, petitioner is directed to join the investigation within two weeks from today, or as and when called by the investigating agency, and in the eventuality of the arrest, petitioner would be released on anticipatory bail, subject to his furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer. The petitioner shall also be abide by all the conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.).
10.
Besides, it is directed that petitioner would hand over his passport to the Investigating Agency or to Court concerned, if he possesses. Otherwise, would submit an affidavit, disclosing the fact that he does not possess any passport.
It is also directed that before leaving country any time during trial, petitioner would seek prior permission of the Court. 11.
With the reasons recorded here above, present petition stands disposed of.
(SANJAY VASHISTH) 16.03.2026 JUDGE Lavisha Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No