Authority: High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh
Order Date: 16 July 2026
Case Overview
- Petitioner: Harpal Singh (appearing through Advocate Mohit Vashishat).
- Respondent: State of Punjab, represented by AAG Punjab Mr. Akash Yadav.
- FIR No. 7 dated 02‑04‑2026 lodged under Sections 316(2) & 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 24 of the Immigration Act.
- Allegation: While employed at Bright Future Immigration Firm, petitioner received ₹4,92,000 from the complainant for processing a work visa and purchasing airline tickets to Armenia for the complainant’s son, Parmeet Singh. Petitioner allegedly failed to book the tickets and did not return the money.
- Initial interim anticipatory bail was ordered on 03‑06‑2026, but the order was not uploaded on the court website, so petitioner was unaware and could not appear before the arresting/investigating officer.
- State counsel filed a status report (affidavit of PPS, DSP, NRI Wing, District SAS Nagar) stating petitioner had joined the investigation but opposed bail, claiming lack of cooperation in recovering the money.
- Petitioner argued that joining investigation does not compel self‑incrimination and that he was ready to cooperate, invoking precedents Arnesh Kumar Vs State of Bihar (AIR 2014 SCC 2756) and Satender Kumar Antil Vs Crime Bureau of Investigation (2022 AIR SC 3386).
Final Outcome
- The Court held that a petitioner who has joined investigation is entitled to anticipatory bail and, without commenting on the merits, converted the interim bail dated 03‑06‑2026 into absolute anticipatory bail.
- Bail is subject to the conditions prescribed under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, including furnishing personal and surety bonds satisfactory to the arresting/investigating officer and joining the investigation whenever called upon.
- All pending Criminal Revision Matters (CRM(s)), if any, were disposed of accordingly.
Topics: Anticipatory Bail, Criminal Procedure