Harsharan Kaur Alias Harsharnjeet Kaur v. State Of Punjab
-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: 29.01.2026 Harsharan Kaur alias Harsharnjeet Kaur ....Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab ....Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL Present:- Mr. Manish Bansal, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Aiman J. Chishti, AAG, Punjab.
***** RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL, J. (ORAL) 1.
Prayer in the present petition filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 (438 of Cr.P.C.) is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.154 dated 19.09.2025 registered under Sections 316(2), 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (perimetria to Sections 406, 420 IPC, respectively) at Police Station Shri Anandpur Sahib, District Rupnagar.
2.
On 23.01.2026, following order was passed by this Court: - "Prayer in the present petition filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 (438 of Cr.P.C.) is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.154 dated 19.09.2025 registered under Sections 316(2),
318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (perimetria to Sections 406, 420 IPC, respectively) at Police Station Shri Anandpur Sahib, District Rupnagar.
Brief facts as per the prosecution case are that the petitioner along with her husband and son duped the complainants of approximately Rs. 40 Lacs on the pretext of sending them abroad on work visa.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a 63 years old retired teacher and enjoys a respectable standing in the society. He further submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case being mother of co-accused, Gurpreet Singh Sethi, with whom she does not share cordial relation. It is argued that the complainant had directly negotiated with the co-accused Gurpreet Singh Sethi, for arranging work visas, and it was the co-accused who, acting as an agent facilitated an "Immigration Support Service Agreement" with a Europe based firm. The petitioner submits that she has no connection whatsoever with the said consulting firm and was completely unaware of the terms of the agreement entered into between the complainants and the consulting entity.
Learned counsel contends that the present dispute has arisen solely between the complainants and the consulting firm on account of delays in processing the refund. Since the petitioner's son was involved in arranging the visa-related formalities through the said firm, the complainants have now dragged the petitioner into the matter only to exert pressure and compel her to compensate them for their alleged losses. It is argued that the petitioner is not even remotely connected with the transaction in question.
Learned counsel further submits that there is not a single monetary transaction between the petitioner and
the complainants, nor has the petitioner derived any monetary benefit from the co-accused-Gurpreet Singh Sethi. Further, co-accused Parwinder Singh alias Parvinder Singh alias Parvinder Singh Sethi has already been granted the concession of anticipatory bail by this Court in CRM-M-60804-2025, vide order dated 02.12.2025. Moreover, the petitioner has clean antecedents as she is not involved in any other case. He further contends that the petitioner is ready and willing to join the investigation as and when called upon to do so by the investigating agency.
On the other hand, learned State counsel has already filed status report and while referring to the same, has opposed the prayer of the petitioner for grant of anticipatory bail by submitting that the allegations levelled against the petitioner are serious in nature. He further submitted that the petitioner along with coaccused hatched a conspiracy against the complainants by duping them of a huge amount on the pretext of sending them to Italy on work visa and did not return their money. However, he could not controvert the fact that the petitioner has clean antecedents.
List on 29.01.2026.
In the meantime, the present petitioner is directed to join investigation within a week from today and would appear as and when required by the Investigating Officer and cooperate with the Investigating Agency. In the event of arrest, she shall be admitted to interim bail on furnishing of bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of Arresting/Investigating Officer. The petitioner shall also abide by the conditions as envisaged under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023".
3.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in compliance of the order dated 23.01.2026, passed by this Court, the petitioner has joined the investigation.
4.
Learned counsel for the State, on instructions from ASI Jasmeet Singh, has submitted that the petitioner has joined the investigation and is no longer required for further investigation.
5.
In view of the statement made by learned State counsel, the interim order dated 23.01.2026 passed by this Court, is made absolute. The petitioner shall continue to join investigation, as and when called by the Investigating Officer and shall also abide by the conditions as provided under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
(RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL) 29.01.2026 JUDGE monika i) Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No `ii) Whether reportable? Yes/No