Court affirms seriousness of allegations, emphasizes need for custodial interrogation to ensure effective investigation
In a significant ruling, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has dismissed a second anticipatory bail petition filed by Lehna Singh and another in connection with a high-profile immigration fraud case. The petition was filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, following the rejection of earlier petitions by both the High Court and the Supreme Court of India. Justice Sumeet Goel presided over the proceedings, highlighting the gravity of the allegations and the necessity for custodial interrogation.
The petitioners, accused of immigration fraud involving Rs. 35,00,000, had previously been directed by the Supreme Court to surrender and apply for regular bail, a directive they have yet to comply with. Despite claiming a compromise had been reached with the complainant, the court maintained that such an agreement could not override Supreme Court instructions.
The case revolves around allegations that the petitioners deceived Tega Singh, promising to facilitate his son Gurpinder Singh's immigration to the United States. Instead, Gurpinder was sent to Thailand and Dubai without securing a visa for the US, resulting in substantial financial loss and emotional distress for the complainant.
Justice Goel emphasized the serious nature of the offenses, which include Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 13 of the Punjab Travel Professionals (Regulation) Act, 2014. The court underscored that these crimes not only involve financial deceit but also constitute a threat to human dignity and national interest. Such offenses, the court noted, must be dealt with firmly to protect public trust and prevent recurrence.
The judgment further stressed the importance of custodial interrogation in cases of organized crime like immigration fraud, noting that granting anticipatory bail could impede effective investigation. The court cited the Supreme Court's decision in State v. Anil Sharma to support the need for custodial interrogation, which is seen as crucial for uncovering broader conspiracies and verifying facts.
In conclusion, the Punjab and Haryana High Court found no compelling grounds to extend anticipatory bail to the petitioners, deeming the petition devoid of merit. The court's decision marks a robust stance against immigration fraud, reinforcing the judiciary's commitment to upholding the integrity of lawful immigration processes and protecting vulnerable citizens from exploitation.
Bottom line:-
Second petition for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, is not maintainable when earlier petitions for the same relief were dismissed by both the High Court and the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Compromise between parties cannot override or dilute the directions issued by the Supreme Court.
Statutory provision(s): Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 13 of the Punjab Travel Professionals (Regulation) Act, 2014.
Lehna Singh v. State of Punjab, (Punjab And Haryana) : Law Finder Doc id # 2938080
