Neeraj Kumar Vaid vs State of Punjab

VIKRAM AGGARWAL, J. (ORAL)

The prayer in the present petition preferred under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, 'the BNSS') is for the grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.0114, dated 23.04.2026 registered at Police Station Sadar Dhuri, District Sangrur, under Sections 318(4), 316(2) and 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short, 'the BNS') and Section 13 of the Punjab Travel Professionals (Regulation) Act, 2014.

Custody certificate dated 02.09.2026 filed in Court today is taken on record. The Registry is directed to tag the same at an appropriate place on the case file.

On a complaint submitted by one Balwinder Singh and others, the FIR in question was registered. The allegations once again were of charging money for sending the complainants abroad. It was stated that the main accused Ravi Chander had demanded money for sending the complainants on a work permit visa to New Zealand. They were also told that the visa had arrived, after their medical check up was done at Max Hospital, Chandigarh. They were shown the visa on a laptop stating that it was valid for three years and would be subsequently extended in New Zealand. More money was demanded and paid. However, since the visa could not come, the accused assured that the amount would be returned, but the same was not returned.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated. He submits that the petitioner is in custody for the last 02 months and 03 days, he having been arrested on 28.06.2026. He further submits that many of the co-accused including the main accused Ravi Chander have been granted interim protection and the matter has been referred to the Mediation & Conciliation Centre on a joint statement of the co-accused and the complainant. He further submits that in so far as the petitioner is concerned, no recovery has to be made from him; finalization of the matter shall take time and, therefore, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner in custody any longer.

Per contra, learned counsel representing the State has opposed the bail petition.

I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties.

Concededly, the petitioner is in custody for the last 02 months and 03 days, he having been arrested on 28.06.2026. Co-accused including the main accused Ravi Chander have been granted interim protection and the matter has been referred to the Mediation & Conciliation Centre on a joint statement of the co-accused and the complainant. No recovery has to be made from the petitioner. Finalization of the matter shall take time and, therefore, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner in custody any longer.

In view of the aforementioned facts and circumstances, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate.