Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail to Immigration Firm Owner in ₹66 Lakh Human Trafficking Fraud Case
Case Name: Mohammad Shahid v. State of Punjab
Date of Judgment: October 24, 2025
Citation: CRM-M-59876-2025
Bench: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Virinder Aggarwal
Held: The Punjab & Haryana High Court dismissed a petition seeking anticipatory bail filed by Mohammad Shahid, owner of Afforx Consultancy, accused of duping several families of over ₹66 lakh under the pretext of sending their children abroad on tourist visas. Justice Virinder Aggarwal held that custodial interrogation was necessary to trace the money trail, identify the complete network involved in the illegal immigration racket, and recover documents and evidence connected with the fraudulent operation. The Court observed that the accusations involved serious offences endangering the lives of victims who were left stranded in Nepal under dangerous conditions, and therefore, pre-arrest protection could not be granted
Summary: The FIR was registered on the complaint of Ram Nath, Baljit Singh, and Waryam Singh, who alleged that the petitioner and his son Imran Khan, owners of Afforx Consultancy in Ahmedgarh, along with two associates, induced them to pay ₹16.5 lakh per child for sending their children to Australia. They handed over a total of ₹66 lakh through bank transfers, demand drafts, and cash payments. The accused also collected original documents including passports, PAN cards, and educational certificates of the four children. The children were first sent to Kolkata, kept there for six days, then brought back to Delhi and later flown to Kathmandu, Nepal. There, an unidentified associate of the accused demanded 5,500 Australian dollars from each child, threatening them with death upon refusal. The victims eventually escaped captivity and returned to Delhi on December 19, 2024.
Justice Aggarwal noted that multiple payments were made directly into Mohammad Shahid’s account and that he was actively involved in the operations of the consultancy. The Court held that the nature of the allegations like human trafficking, fraud, and confinement abroad necessitated custodial interrogation to expose the modus operandi and trace other accomplices. The petitioner’s claim that he was falsely implicated merely because he was the father of co-accused Imran Khan was rejected, as the FIR and transaction records indicated direct involvement.
Decision: The High Court dismissed the anticipatory bail petition, holding that the offences were grave, involved exploitation and deception of innocent persons, and required thorough investigation through custodial interrogation. The Court concluded that the petitioner did not deserve the discretionary relief of pre-arrest bail.