Bakul Raj Goel v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision : October 23, 2024 BAKUL RAJ GOEL -PETITIONER V/S STATE OF PUNJAB -RESPONDENT

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP TIWARI

Present:

Mr. Siddharth Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Pardeep Bajaj, D.A.G., Punjab.

*** KULDEEP TIWARI, J. (ORAL) CRM-42221-2024 1.

As prayed for, the instant application is allowed. Annexures P-5 to P-8 are ordered to be taken on record, subject to all just exceptions. CRM-M-49957-2024 2.

Through the instant petition, as instituted under Section 482 of the B.N.S.S., 2023, the petitioner seeks the concession of anticipatory bail, in case FIR No.130 dated 31.07.2024, under Sections 420/34 of the IPC, registered at P.S. Canal Colony, Bathinda.

3.

The present FIR derives its origin from the complaint made by one Balkar Singh (hereinafter referred to as the 'complainant'). Succinctly stated, the allegations voiced in the present FIR are that, the petitioner along with his co-accused Aditi Goel and Urvashi Goel deceived the complainant for ₹ 16 lacs, on the pretext of procuring U.K. visas and work permits for his son and daughter-in-law. The gist of the allegations, as becomes narrated in

the order dated 09.09.2024, whereby, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bathinda, has declined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, is reproduced hereunder:- ".....complaint against Aditi Goel, Bakul Raj Goel and Urvashi Goel was moved by complainant Balkar Singh on the allegations that he is a retired Pharmacist from health department. His son Sukhdeep Singh is MBBS doctor. His daughter-in-law Amarjit Kaur has done B.Sc. Nursing and they are working at their respective jobs. In the year 2016-2017, his son had gone to Delhi for the preparation of Civil Services. There accused Aditi Goel was also taking coaching and they got acquainted with each other.

In the year 2023, said Aditi Goel and his mother Urvashi Goel told his son Sukhdeep and daughter-in-law Amarjit Kaur that they will send them to UK on work permit where the living standard is very good and they will have good earning. They also made them to believe that they have good immigration work and they have also sent many person abroad in different ways. On being asked, his daughter-inlaw and his son handed over their documents & passports to the accused at their Ludhiana office to secure the work permits. They also gave the accused Rs.1,50,000/- in cash on 18.10.2023 and the accused entered into a written agreement with them.

They also made the complainant party talk to one of their relative in UK, who also assured them that their work permits will be arranged and they shall deposit the money with Aditi Goel, Bakul Raj Goel and Urvashi Goel. The accused have a firm in the name of Adite's Learning Space in which Aditi is CEO, Bakul Raj is MD and Urvashi Goel is consultant and cashier. The complainant further alleged that they have paid Rs.16,00,000/- to all the three accused on different dates, out of which an amount of Rs.8,00,000/- was paid in cash and remaining was deposited from bank accounts of complainant, his wife Amarjit Kaur and daughter-in-law Amarjit Kaur in different bank accounts of Bakul Raj Goel and Urvashi Goel. Some amount was also sent to them in March 2024 through google pay.

Kaur has come and they asked them to deposit Rs.4,40,000/- more. As such, the complainant party also deposited the said amount in the bank account of Urvashi on 02.04.2024. On 05.04.2024, they got to know that no such visa of UK of his daughter-in-law Amarjit Kaur has been received. The accused kept telling them that they will arrange visa and work permit. However, on 14.05.2024 on getting passport of her daughter-in-law, they got to know that no such visa had come. As such the accused have cheated them. They have also closed their Ludhiana office and on inquiry, they came to know that the said accused have cheated many persons on the pretext of sending them abroad. The complainant prayed for getting their amount of Rs.16,00,000/- and their documents returned from the accused. On the basis of said complaint, an inquiry was conducted by DSP(PBI), EO Wing, on the basis of whose report, the present FIR was ordered to be registered against the said three accused persons including the bail applicant."

4.

Although the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has no concern with the alleged offence(s), however, this submission is falsified from a written agreement executed between the parties, inasmuch as, it has surfaced during investigation that the petitioner is a signatory to the said agreement.

5.

Another argument constructed by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that, the visa applications of the complainant's son and daughter-in-law were successful, however, this argument also pales into insignificance, as actual visas were never granted to the complainant's son and daughter-in-law.

6.

Since there are allegations against the petitioner that he received money from the complainant in his bank account, therefore, this Court posed a specific query to the petitioner's counsel, as to whether the petitioner is ready and willing to return the received amount, but, the answer

thereto was made in negative.

7.

It would also be apt to record here that, although in paragraph 47 of the instant petition, which is accompanied by petitioner's affidavit, a disclosure has been made that the petitioner does not have any criminal antecedents, however, this disclosure is disputed by the learned State counsel, who is in receipt of advance notice. The learned State counsel, on instructions imparted to him by A.S.I. Arjan Singh, informs this Court that the petitioner is involved in two more FIRs, details whereof are:- (i) FIR No. 122 dated 22.06.2024, under Sections 420/34 of the IPC, registered at P.S. City-2 Khanna; and (ii) FIR No.89 dated 26.04.2024, registered at P.S. New Baradari, Jalandhar.

8.

Taking into account the gravity of the allegations, as also the hereinabove discussed conduct of the petitioner that he made concealment about his criminal antecedents, this Court is not inclined to grant the extraordinary relief of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 9.

In summa, the instant petition is dismissed.

(KULDEEP TIWARI) October 23, 2024 JUDGE devinder Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether Reportable :

Yes/No