Authority: High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh

Order Date: 07.07.2026

Case Overview

  • Petitioner: Pargati Gupta (aged ~36), mother of two minor children (ages 7 and 3).
  • Respondent: State of Punjab.
  • Case Number: CRM‑M‑28648‑2026.
  • Petition Filed Under: Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking regular bail.
  • Underlying FIR: FIR No.06 dated 06.01.2026, registered at Police Station City‑1, District Malerkotla, under Sections 318(4), 316(2), 61(2) and 238 BNS, 2023 (corresponding to IPC Sections 420, 406, 120‑B and 201) and Section 13 of the Punjab Travel Professional Act, 2014.
  • Allegations: Complainant Rohit Kumar, together with his wife Priya Ahuja and daughter Kashvi, approached co‑accused Sachin Gupta and Saurav Gupta, who allegedly operated an immigration consultancy named "Canada PR Advisory" (Patiala) to obtain permanent residency in Canada. The complainant family allegedly paid a total of Rs.42,05,392 via bank transfers, cheques, Google Pay and cash, as directed by the co‑accused.
  • Petitioner’s Specific Allegation: Receipt of Rs.3,32,500 through Cheque No.258175 deposited into her bank account on the direction of her husband/co‑accused Saurav Gupta.
  • Custody Details: Petitioner has been in judicial custody since 03.03.2026, amounting to roughly four months.
  • Additional Criminal Case: Petitioner's involvement in another criminal case is noted, but she is described as a homemaker with no control over the business.
  • Co‑Accused Bail Status: Saurav Gupta and Sachin Gupta were each granted regular bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Court on 12.06.2026 (orders CRM‑M‑33282‑2026 and CRM‑M‑33266‑2026), after approximately two months and eight days of incarceration.
  • Legal Submissions: Counsel argued that the petitioner’s role is merely transactional, lacking dishonest intent, and that the immigration process had already resulted in a work permit visa for the complainant’s wife, indicating a civil dispute rather than a criminal cheating offence. It was also contended that Section 13 of the Punjab Travel Professionals Regulation Act, 2014, does not apply as the consultancy was licensed.
  • State Counsel Position: Opposed bail, asserting the nature of allegations does not merit regular bail.
  • Court Reasoning: The Court referenced Section 480(1) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, which allows bail for women, children, or sick persons even in non‑bailable offences, especially when prolonged custody is unjustified. The offences are triable by a Magistrate, and the petitioner has already endured four months in custody, unlike co‑accused who were released after about two months.

Final Outcome

  • The Court grants regular bail to petitioner Pargati Gupta.
  • Petitioner must furnish bail/surety bonds satisfactory to the trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Illaqa Magistrate/Duty Magistrate, unless otherwise required.
  • She is prohibited from threatening or influencing any prosecution witness, directly or indirectly.
  • The order does not constitute an opinion on the merits of the case; the trial Court is directed to decide the matter independently based on evidence.
  • Petition is disposed of.

Topics: Bail, Criminal Procedure, Immigration Consultancy