Fake Travel Agent to Kidnapping Racket: Punjab & Haryana HC Denies Anticipatory Bail in ₹50 Lakh Overseas Scam
Case Name: Charanjit Kaur v. State of Punjab
Date of Judgment: 25.03.2026
Citation: CRM-M-63528-2025
Bench: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Jasjit Singh Bedi
Held: The High Court held that anticipatory bail cannot be granted where a prima facie case discloses serious offences involving cheating, kidnapping, and ransom, especially when the accused appears to be part of an organized criminal conspiracy and custodial interrogation is necessary.
Summary: The petitioner sought anticipatory bail in a case involving allegations of cheating, illegal immigration, kidnapping, and ransom demand under provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
The prosecution case revealed that the petitioner, operating as a travel agent, induced the complainant to send his son abroad to Australia for a sum of ₹27.75 lakhs. The petitioner assured that the travel would be arranged and initially took money and documents from the complainant’s family .
Subsequently, the complainant’s son was sent on a circuitous route through multiple locations instead of a direct flight. During the journey, he was allegedly kidnapped by foreign handlers and ransom demands were made. The complainant received threatening calls and video clips showing his son being assaulted, and was coerced into paying large sums of money in instalments.
It was alleged that a total of ₹24 lakhs was paid to different persons linked to the accused, apart from earlier payments made to the petitioner’s agency account. Despite such payments, the victim was not released.
The petitioner argued that she was falsely implicated and had herself provided information to the police regarding other accused persons. It was also contended that she was merely acting as a facilitator and had no role in the alleged kidnapping.
The Court, however, observed that the allegations disclosed a coordinated conspiracy involving inducement, illegal trafficking, and extortion. It noted that substantial amounts had been transferred to the petitioner and that the events indicated her connivance with other accused.
Relying on settled law, the Court reiterated that anticipatory bail is an extraordinary remedy and must be granted sparingly. It emphasized that the existence of a prima facie case and the gravity of offence are the primary considerations.
Decision: The High Court dismissed the petition and denied anticipatory bail to the petitioner. It held that the allegations disclose a serious and organized criminal operation involving cheating, kidnapping, and ransom, and that custodial interrogation is necessary to uncover the full extent of the conspiracy.