Akhil Dawar vs State Of Punjab

Court
Punjab and Haryana High Court

CRM CRM-M-58286 CRM CRM 58286 58286-2026 58286 2026 2026 2026
1


rdrd rdrd
102 ( 102 (3 102 ( 102 ( case) case) case) case)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
ATCHANDIGARH ATCHANDIGARH
ATCHANDIGARH ATCHANDIGARH

CRM CRM-M-58286 CRM CRM 58286 58286-2026 58286 2026 2026 2026

Akhil Dawar
....Petitioner
versus
State of Punjab
....Respondent

Date of Decision: Date of Decision: November 11 Date of Decision: Date of Decision: November 11 November 11, 2026 November 11 , 2026 , 2026 , 2026
Date of Uploading: Date of Uploading: November Date of Uploading: Date of Uploading: November November 12 November 12 12, 2026 12 , 2026 , 2026 , 2026

CORAM: CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL CORAM: CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL

Present Present: Present Present Mr. Preetinder S. Ahluwalia, Senior Advocate with
Mr. Siddharth Sihag, Advocate and
Mr. Gaurav Jain, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Adhiraj Singh Thind, AAG Punjab.

Mr. Govind Chauhan, Advocate for the complainant.


SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL SUMEET GOEL , J. (Oral) , J. (Oral) , J. (Oral) , J. (Oral)

Present petition has been filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter to be referred as ‘the BNSS’)
for grant of pre-arrest/anticipatory bail to the petitioner, in case bearing FIR
No.147 dated 25.05.2026, registered for the offence punishable under
Sections 318(4), 336(2), 336(3), 340(2), 351(2) & 61(2) of the BNS, 2023,
at Police Station Sarabha Nagar, District Police Commissionerate, Ludhiana.
2. For the sake of ease, relevant factual milieu drawn from the
order dated 19.06.2026 passed by the concerned Sessions Court (whereby
anticipatory bail plea of the petitioner was rejected), reads thus:
MAHAVIR SINGH
2026.11.12 09:48
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/ judgment

CRM CRM-M-58286 CRM CRM 58286 58286-2026 58286 2026 2026 2026
2

“ 5. As per record, the FIR was registered on basis of a complaint dated
15.05.2026 moved by Deepak Garg that all the accused are running a
professional syndicate under guise of an immigration consultancy and
defrauded him of Rs.25,00,000/-. The accused guaranteed a U.K. skilled
work visa for him within 90 days without any requirement of IELTS. The
first payment of Rs.12,00,000/- was paid on 29.01.2026 at the residence of
accused, to all four accused named in the FIR. Accused Abhishek Ahuja
took physical possession of original passport and educational certificates
of complainant. On 26.02.2026 accused Nitish Bajaj showed visa
approved to complainant on a forged online portal on his laptop and he
was induced to pay further amount of Rs.13,00,000/-. Thereafter, accused
demanded Rs.55,00,000/- and to gain his faith, on 03.04.2026 accused
Gulshan Ahuja and Akhil Dawar showed him certificate of sponsorship in
their laptop, which was also forged. When he confronted the accused that
the digital QR code shown on the said document has redirected to a dead
link, he was criminally intimidated and threatened. Neither his money was
returned nor visa was procured. ”

3. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner has iterated that a bare
perusal of the FIR itself shows that allegations leveled against the petitioner are
concocted, improbable and devoid of any merit. Learned Senior counsel has
further iterated that the petitioner has been falsely implicated into the FIR in
question. It has been contended that there is an unexplained and inordinate
delay of more than 01 month in the registration of the FIR in question. Learned
Senior Counsel has pointed out that, as per the complainant’s own version, an
amount of Rs.13 lakh was allegedly paid on 06.04.2026, whereas the FIR was
registered only on 15.05.2026. Such unexplained delay, it is argued, casts
serious doubt on the veracity of the prosecution version. It has further been
submitted that no amount was either transferred to the petitioner’s bank account
or paid to him in cash. Learned Senior Counsel has also disputed the allegations
regarding the petitioner’s alleged involvement in the immigration business and
the location of the business as alleged in the FIR, contending that the same are
wholly baseless. It has been asserted that the petitioner is a well-reputed
businessman since 2010 and is running a proprietorship firm of manufacturing
and trading of fabric and yarn under the name of Akhil Knitwear, Ludhiana.
Learned Senior counsel has also contended that sole allegation of showing a
MAHAVIR SINGH
2026.11.12 09:48
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/ judgment

CRM CRM-M-58286 CRM CRM 58286 58286-2026 58286 2026 2026 2026
3

certificate of sponsorship to the complainant is totally baseless, false and
fabricated.
3.1. Learned Senior Counsel has further contended that, prior to
registration of the FIR in question, one Vineet Garg had got FIR No.100 dated
13.08.2024 registered against other co-accused through his employee, namely,
Davinder Singh, wherein the petitioner was subsequently nominated vide GD
No.33 dated 12.09.2024; and the allegations forming the subject matter of the
said FIR essentially bear civil overtones. It has been argued that the present FIR
is nothing but an attempt to wreak vengeance upon and further harass the
petitioner, particularly in view of the fact that the complainant in the present
FIR, namely, Deepak Garg, is the cousin of the aforesaid Vineet Garg. Learned
Senior Counsel has also pointed out that the present FIR and the aforesaid FIR
No.100 have been registered at the same police station, i.e. Police Station
Sarabha Nagar. On the strength of the aforesaid circumstances, it has been
vehemently contended that the present FIR has been lodged with the ulterior
motive of further harassing the petitioner and is an outcome of the previous
animosity. Learned Senior counsel has also urged that the petitioner is on
anticipatory bail in the aforesaid FIR No.100.
3.2. Learned Senior counsel has argued that nothing is to be
recovered from the petitioner. Learned Senior counsel has further iterated
that the petitioner is ready and willing to join investigation. On the basis of
the aforementioned submissions, grant of the instant petition is prayed for.
4. On the other hand, learned State counsel has opposed the grant
of anticipatory bail by arguing that serious allegations have been levelled
against the petitioner. It has been argued that petitioner, along with other co-
accused, had induced the complainant to part with a substantial amount of
MAHAVIR SINGH
2026.11.12 09:48
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/ judgment

CRM CRM-M-58286 CRM CRM 58286 58286-2026 58286 2026 2026 2026
4

money on the false pretext of sending him abroad. According to learned
State counsel, the offence committed by the petitioner caused substantial
financial and emotional distress to the victim. It has been submitted that
considering the seriousness of the allegations, custodial interrogation of the
petitioner is necessary for fair and effective investigation. Given the severity
of the offence, there exists a substantial likelihood that the petitioner may
abscond or tamper with the evidence, if the petitioner is enlarged on bail.
Thus, dismissal of the petition in hand is prayed for.
4.1. Learned counsel for the complainant has vehemently opposed
the present petition, contending that serious allegations have been levelled
against the petitioner. It has been asserted that the petitioner was an active
member of an organised, multi-stage immigration fraud syndicate. Learned
counsel has further submitted that the petitioner and his co-accused had
induced the complainant to part with a substantial amount of money on the
pretext of securing a UK Skilled Worker Visa without IELTS and also
demanded an additional Rs.55,00,000/- through criminal intimidation. It has
been further contended that, having regard to the gravity and nature of the
allegations, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is imperative for
effecting the recovery of certain documents, including those belonging to the
complainant, as well as the defrauded amount. The act of the petitioner and
his co-accused, it has been contended, caused severe financial and emotional
distress to the complainant. In view of the aforesaid circumstances, it has
been argued that the petitioner may abscond from the process justice, in case
the petitioner is afforded the concession of anticipatory bail; hence the
MAHAVIR SINGH
2026.11.12 09:48
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/ judgment

CRM CRM-M-58286 CRM CRM 58286 58286-2026 58286 2026 2026 2026
5

petitioner does not deserve the concession of anticipatory bail. Accordingly,
dismissal of the present petition has been vehemently sought for.
5. I have heard the learned counsel for the rival parties and have
gone through the available record of the case.
6. As per the prosecution case, the allegations against the
petitioner are serious in nature. Perusal of the prosecution case, material
available on record, the reply filed by the State, as also the order whereby
anticipatory bail of the petitioner was declined by the concerned Sessions
Court, prima facie reveals that the petitioner, along with his co-accused, had
actively participated and played specific roles in inducing the complainant to
part with a substantial amount of money on the pretext of sending him
abroad. As per prosecution case, the allegations levelled against the
petitioner are specific and attributed to them by name, warranting a thorough
investigation. It is further the case of the prosecution that the original
documents of the complainant, including his passport and educational
certificates, are yet to be recovered from the petitioner and his co-accused.
The amount allegedly paid by the complainant is also yet to be recovered.
Besides, evidence pertaining to the forged documents allegedly displayed on
the laptops is required to be collected. Keeping in the view factual milieu of
the case in hand; especially the seriousness & gravity of the allegations; this
Court is of the, prima facie , opinion that the petitioner does not deserve the
concession of extraordinary relief of anticipatory bail.
6.1. Such offences strike at the core of public trust and reflect a
disturbing trend prevalent in this region, where unscrupulous individuals
posing as travel facilitators exploit the aspirations of innocent citizens
MAHAVIR SINGH
2026.11.12 09:48
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/ judgment

CRM CRM-M-58286 CRM CRM 58286 58286-2026 58286 2026 2026 2026
6

seeking opportunities abroad. These fraudulent activities not only cause
severe financial and emotional distress but also undermine the integrity of
lawful immigration systems. Therefore, individuals involved in such
organized deceit must be dealt with firmly and in accordance with the law,
leaving no room for leniency.
6.2. Vide order dated 15.09.2026 passed by this Court in connected
cases, i.e., CRM CRM-M-35712 35712-2026 2026 and CRM CRM-M-37151 37151-2026 2026, the State was
CRM CRM 35712 35712 2026 2026 CRM CRM 37151 37151 2026 2026
directed to place on record a specific affidavit of the Investigating Officer
with regard to the submission made on behalf of the petitioner that the
complainant in the present FIR, namely, Deepak Garg, is connected/related
to the complainant, namely, Vineet Garg, in FIR No.100 dated 13.08.2024,
registered at Police Station Sarabha Nagar, Police Commissionerate,
Ludhiana. In compliance with the aforesaid order, the State has filed a
compliance report by way of an affidavit(s) dated 29.10.2026 (in CRM CRM CRM-M- CRM
35712 35712-2026 35712 35712 2026 2026 and CRM 2026 CRM CRM-M-37151 CRM 7151 7151-2026 7151 2026 2026), which is already on record of the 2026
said cases. The relevant extract of the said compliance report reads as under:
“ 13. That in compliance with the order dated 15.09.2026 passed by this
Hon’ble Court, it is respectfully submitted that, as per the record of
FIR No.147 dated 25.05.2026 and FIR No.100 dated 13.08.2024,
Deepak Garg son of Raj Kumar and Vineet Garg son of Vinod
Kumar Garg are not related to each other. Accordingly, the
averment in paragraph 4(h) of the petition that Deepak Garg is a
cousin of Vineet Garg is incorrect and is specifically denied. ”

6.3. Perusal of the petition in hand shows that the petitioner has
himself admitted therein that he is/was involved in 01 more FIR(s). The
aforesaid criminal antecedent(s) reveal that the petitioner is a habitual
offender with a tendency to indulge in criminal activities. Such antecedent(s)
cannot be brushed aside as a mere coincidence and is a relevant
consideration while adjudicating the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail.
MAHAVIR SINGH
2026.11.12 09:48
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/ judgment

CRM CRM-M-58286 CRM CRM 58286 58286-2026 58286 2026 2026 2026
7

The criminal antecedent(s) of the petitioner also raise a reasonable
apprehension that, if enlarged on bail, he may indulge in similar criminal
activities, misuse the concession of bail, or interfere with the fair course of
justice. The possibility of his absconding or influencing prosecution
witnesses also cannot be ruled out.
6.4. The other pleas raised by the petitioner, including those of false
implication etc., are matters to be adjudicated on the basis of evidence
during the course of trial. Such disputed questions of fact(s) cannot be
conclusively determined at the stage of consideration of the petitioner’s
prayer for anticipatory bail.
6.5. The iteration at the end of the petitioner that the petitioner has
been falsely implicated on account of a civil/ monetary dispute which is
subject matter of a previous case/ litigation between the FIR-complainant in
the said earlier case/ FIR and the petitioner ( herein ) cannot be countenanced
at this juncture.
6.6. No cause nay plausible cause has been shown, at this stage,
from which it can be deciphered that the petitioner has been falsely
implicated into the present FIR. It goes without saying that in the instant
case, the complainant has categorically stated that the petitioner, along with
his co-accused, had actively participated and played specific roles in
inducing the complainant to part with a substantial amount of money on the
pretext of sending him abroad, which caused severe financial and emotional
distress.
7. It is befitting to mention here that while considering a plea for
grant of anticipatory bail, the Court has to equilibrate between safeguarding
MAHAVIR SINGH
2026.11.12 09:48
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/ judgment

CRM CRM-M-58286 CRM CRM 58286 58286-2026 58286 2026 2026 2026
8

individual rights and protecting societal interests. The Court ought to reckon
with the magnitude and nature of the offence; the role attributed to the
accused; the need for free and fair investigation as also the deeper and wider
impact of such alleged iniquities on the society. It is imperative that every
person in the Society can expect an atmosphere free from foreboding & fear
of any transgression. At this stage, there is no material on record to hold that
prima facie case is not made out against the petitioner. The material which
has come on record and preliminary investigation appear to establish a
reasonable basis for the accusations. Thus, it is not appropriate to grant
anticipatory bail to the petitioner, as it would necessarily cause impediment
in effective investigation. In State State State v. Anil Sharma, (1997) 7 SCC 187 :1997 State v. Anil Sharma, (1997) 7 SCC 187 :1997 v. Anil Sharma, (1997) 7 SCC 187 :1997 v. Anil Sharma, (1997) 7 SCC 187 :1997
SCC (Cri) 1039] SCC (Cri) 1039], the Supreme Court held as under : (SCC p. 189, para 6) SCC (Cri) 1039] SCC (Cri) 1039]
“ 6. We find force in the submission of CBI that custodial interrogation is
qualitatively more elicitation-oriented than questioning a suspect who is well-
ensconced with a favourable order under Section 438 of the Code. In a case
like this, effective interrogation of a suspected person is of tremendous
advantage in disinterring many useful informations and also materials which
would have been concealed. Success in such interrogation would elude if the
suspected person knows that he is well protected and insulated by a pre-arrest
bail order during the time he is interrogated. Very often interrogation in such
a condition would reduce to a mere ritual. The argument that the custodial
interrogation is fraught with the danger of the person being subjected to third-
degree methods need not be countenanced, for, such an argument can be
advanced by all accused in all criminal cases. The Court has to presume that
responsible police officers would conduct themselves in a responsible manner
and that those entrusted with the task of disinterring offences would not
conduct themselves as offenders. ”

8. In view of the seriousness & gravity of the allegations, this
Court finds no compelling ground to extend the benefit of discretionary
relief of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Moreover, custodial interrogation
of the petitioner is necessary for an effective investigation & to unravel the
truth. The petition is, thus, devoid of merits and is hereby dismissed dismissed dismissed. dismissed
MAHAVIR SINGH
2026.11.12 09:48
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/ judgment

CRM CRM-M-58286 CRM CRM 58286 58286-2026 58286 2026 2026 2026
9

9. Nothing said hereinabove shall be deemed to be an expression
of opinion upon merits of the case/investigation.
10. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed off.









(SUMEET GOEL) (SUMEET GOEL) (SUMEET GOEL) (SUMEET GOEL)
JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE
November 11 November 11, 2026 November 11 November 11 , 2026 , 2026 , 2026
mahavir

Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No

Whether reportable: Yes/No
MAHAVIR SINGH
2026.11.12 09:48
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/ judgment