Harjit Kaur Vs State of Punjab — Cheating and Forgery | Punjab & Haryana HC (2026)

Harjit Kaur Vs State of Punjab — Cheating and Forgery | Punjab & Haryana HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

None to the petitioners - anticipatory bail declined and both petitions dismissed; only ancillary directions issued (SSP, Gurdaspur to inquire into the Investigating Officer's conduct and, if warranted, take appropriate action).

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioners - Harjit Kaur and Manmeet Singh @ Manbir Singh - are entitled to anticipatory bail in FIR No.102 dated 11.09.2024 (Sections 420, 34 IPC and section 13, Punjab Prevention of Human Smuggling Act, 2012, PS Batala, Gurdaspur), particularly in view of their non-compliance with the deposit conditions imposed by the order dated 09.07.2025.

Court's answer

Since even the first instalment of Rs.2 lakhs, required to be deposited within one week of the order dated 09.07.2025, had not been deposited by the petitioners, this Court held that the petitioners are not entitled to any discretionary relief.

Ratio / Principle

Accordingly, both anticipatory-bail petitions (CRM-M-23399-2025 and CRM-M-23520-2025) stand dismissed.

Key takeaways

Observation in strict terms, before parting with the order, that the conduct of the Investigating Officer requires scrutiny: despite registration of the FIR on 11.09.2024, the Investigating Officer has not proceeded effectively against the main accused, Amarjit Singh, causing undue harassment to the complainant.obiter¶10
Ancillary direction: the matter to be inquired into by the Senior Superintendent of Police, Gurdaspur and, if warranted, appropriate action to be taken against the said Investigating Officer; copy of the order forwarded to SSP, Gurdaspur for necessary information and compliance.obiter¶11

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

PHHC (Justice Sanjay Vashisth), 20.03.2026 - Anticipatory bail applications (CRM-M-23399-2025 & CRM-M-23520-2025) of Harjit Kaur and Manmeet Singh @ Manbir Singh - wife and son of main accused travel agent Amarjit Singh - in FIR No.102 dt.11.09.2024, PS Batala, District Gurdaspur, under Sections 420, 34 IPC and section 13, Punjab Prevention of Human Smuggling Act, 2012, DISMISSED. Interim order dt.09.07.2025 had stayed arrest subject to deposit of Rs.2 lakhs within one week and the promised Rs.9 lakhs (50% of the disputed Rs.18 lakhs) before the next date; that conditional order, unsuccessfully challenged before the Apex Court (petition dismissed dt.07.08.2025 in 'Harjit Kaur vs. State of Punjab and others'), stood breached - even the first instalment was admittedly not deposited - so the petitioners were held not entitled to any discretionary relief. Allegations (per para 5 of the impugned order dt.09.04.2025): complainant Gurwinder Singh and his friend Pawandeep Singh were assured of being sent to Italy for Rs.13 lac each; Rs.2 lac each was paid in cash with passports; the applicant received Rs.13 lac in cash and Rs.4,50,000/- was bank-transferred to Amarjit Singh; they were routed via Dubai and Morocco, their papers were forged, and they were deported. Noting the Investigating Officer's failure to proceed effectively against main accused Amarjit Singh despite the FIR of 11.09.2024, the Court directed the SSP, Gurdaspur to inquire into his conduct and, if warranted, take appropriate action.

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Order under challenge
Order dated 09.04.2025 passed in the case of petitioner - Harjit Kaur (referred to as the impugned order); its paragraph 5 records the complainant's grievance, finds the allegations of illicit trafficking of humans serious, and observes that custodial interrogation of the applicant may be required for effective investigation.¶2
09.04.2025
Prior proceeding
Registration of FIR No.102 dated 11.09.2024 under Sections 420, 34 IPC and section 13, Punjab Prevention of Human Smuggling Act, 2012, at Police Station Batala, District Gurdaspur.¶1
Prior proceeding
FIR preceded by a police preliminary inquiry on the complaint of Gurwinder Singh s/o Kulwant Singh against the applicant and her family members.¶2
Prior proceeding
Allegations (per para 5 of the order dated 09.04.2025): travel agent Amarjit Singh assured Gurwinder Singh and his friend Pawandeep Singh of being sent to Italy and demanded Rs.13 lac each; Rs.2 lac each was paid in cash alongwith passports; the applicant received Rs.13 lac in cash and Rs.4,50,000/- was bank-transferred to Amarjit Singh; the duo were sent to Dubai and then Morocco, their papers were found forged, and they were deported from Morocco back to Dubai.¶2
Prior proceeding
Vide order dated 09.07.2025, the petitioners offered to deposit 50% of the total disputed amount, i.e., Rs.9,00,000/- out of Rs.18,00,000/-, within one and a half months; learned counsel for the complainant did not dispute the proposal; matter listed for 21.08.2025.¶4
Prior proceeding
The same order dated 09.07.2025 stayed the arrest of the petitioners subject to their depositing Rs.2,00,000/- within one week and the entire promised amount of Rs.9,00,000/- before the next date of hearing.¶4
Prior proceeding
Petitioner Harjit Kaur challenged the conditional order dated 09.07.2025 before the Apex Court; prayer not allowed; petition dismissed vide order dated 07.08.2025 in 'Harjit Kaur vs. State of Punjab and others', photocopy produced and taken on record.¶6
Prior proceeding
Even the first instalment of Rs.2 lakhs, required to be deposited within one week from 09.07.2025, was admittedly not deposited by the petitioners till the date of this order.¶8