"Mere Association Not Enough for Denial of Bail," Says Punjab & Haryana High Court in Fraud Case

The Punjab and Haryana High Court, in its recent judgment, granted anticipatory bail to Rozy Kaur, who was implicated in a fraud case involving an alleged scam to send an individual abroad. The Court, presided over by Justice Sandeep Moudgil, underscored the absence of direct evidence against the petitioner and her intention to join the investigation as key factors in its decision.

The case revolves around an FIR filed on October 19, 2023, under multiple sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), including Sections 406 (criminal breach of trust), 420 (cheating), 467, 468, 471 (all related to forgery), 506 (criminal intimidation), and 120-B (criminal conspiracy). Additionally, the FIR includes charges under Section 24 of the Immigration Act and Section 25 of the Arms Act.

The complainant, Sandeep Kumar, alleged that the accused, including Rozy Kaur and her husband Dharampal, were involved in a conspiracy to defraud him of INR 20,24,000 under the pretext of sending his nephew, Pankaj, abroad for higher studies and work. The complaint detailed a series of interactions and financial transactions, where the accused allegedly took money for arranging visas and tickets but failed to fulfill their promises. When the complainant demanded his money back, the accused reportedly threatened his life.

The defense argued that Rozy Kaur had been falsely implicated in the case solely because she was Dharampal's wife. It was highlighted that no bank transactions could directly connect her to the alleged fraud. The Court took note of this argument, emphasizing that the petitioner’s name seemed to be included due to her relationship with another accused rather than any substantial evidence against her.

Justice Moudgil observed that the petitioner had demonstrated bona fide intentions to cooperate with the investigation, which played a crucial role in granting her anticipatory bail. The Court found no reason to deny bail, considering her readiness to assist the investigative process and ensure that the final report could be submitted on time.

The Court relied on the principles laid out under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, which permits granting anticipatory bail under certain conditions. The petitioner was directed to join the investigation within a week and to furnish surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer. The order also stipulated that the petitioner must not leave India without prior permission from the Court and must avoid any action that could influence witnesses or obstruct justice.

Justice Sandeep Moudgil stated, "In view of the admitted set of circumstances before this Court, the petitioner is directed to be released on anticipatory bail subject to her joining investigation and cooperating fully."

This decision highlights the Court's balanced approach in considering the rights of the accused while ensuring that the investigation is not hampered. The judgment reinforces the legal standard that mere association with an accused party does not justify the denial of anticipatory bail in the absence of direct evidence. The case will likely set a precedent for similar cases involving allegations of fraud with insufficient direct evidence.

Date of Decision: August 22, 2024​.

Rozy Kaur vs. State of Haryana and Another