Crl. Misc. No. M-18569 of 2011 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-18569 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision: 08.06.2011 Bikram Singh Dhillon ....Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ....Respondent Crl. Misc. No. M-18570 of 2011 (O&M) Amitesh Bhatia ....Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH Present: - Mr. Kanwal S. Walia, Advocate, for the petitioner. 1.Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2.Whether to be referred to the Reporters or not? 3.Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? ***** ALOK SINGH, J (ORAL) This order shall dispose of Crl Misc. No.18569 of 2011 titled Bikram Singh Dhillon Vs. State of Punjab and Crl. Misc. No.18570 of 2011 titled Amitesh Bhatia Vs. State of Punjab, as common questions of law and facts are involved. These are the applications seeking anticipatory bail in case FIR No.58 dated 19.5.2011 under Sections 406/420/465/467/468/471/120-B IPC, Police Station Mohali. As per the prosecution story, petitioners are running travel agency under the name and style of M/s Paragon Overseas, Phase II, Mohali. They assured the complainant that they would get him admitted for the course of Business Management in U.K. on charging total Crl. Misc. No. M-18569 of 2011 (O&M) -2- amount of ` 4,10,000/- , complainant admittedly had paid ` 4,10,000/- to the accused/petitioners herein to get him admitted in the Business Management School in U.K. Accused/petitioners have filled up the forms and prepared the documents and applied for the visa of the complainant. Visa was rejected on the ground that enclosures of the visa application were found to be forged; not only this, complainant was debarred from making fresh application to obtain visa for ten years; not only this, University, in which complainant was to get admission, was meanwhile declared blacklisted. Complainant could not be sent to U.K., as undertook by the accused party having charged ` 4,10,000/-. Learned counsel for the petitioners has vehemently argued that petitioners have already refunded handsome amount to the complainant after deducting the charges and expenses paid by the petitioners. In the opinion of this Court, payment of amount by the complainant to the petitioners is admitted; blacklisting of the institute is also admitted; filling up the forms for obtaining visa by the petitioners is also admitted; visa was rejected having found enclosures forged is also admitted; not only this, complainant was debarred from making fresh application to obtain visa for ten years is also admitted fact. Now-a-days human trafficking is a new type of offence which is coming up and eating the society as white ant. In my opinion, custodial interrogation seems to be must. Considering gravity of the offence, I am not inclined to grant extraordinary relief of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Dismissed. Photocopy of this order be placed on the file of connected case. (Alok Singh) Judge June 08, 2011 R.S.