Inside Court No. 14 on Friday, the Supreme Court wrapped up a short but closely watched hearing involving a Punjab-based advocate accused in a travel fraud case. The bench made it clear that bail decisions cannot hinge on assumptions alone, especially when cooperation with the police is not in doubt.
Background
The case traces back to FIR No. 124 of 2025 registered at Anandpur Sahib police station in Rupnagar district. The allegations centred on a travel agent who allegedly duped several people by promising jobs abroad. Jaskanwar Singh, also known as Jaskaran Singh, a practicing advocate, was named as an accused, mainly because his bank account number surfaced in WhatsApp chats linked to the transactions.
In September, the Punjab and Haryana High Court declined Singh’s request for anticipatory bail. That rejection pushed him to the Supreme Court. During an earlier hearing in October, the top court had granted him interim protection from arrest, noting that the main allegations were directed at the travel agent and that there was no clear claim of money being paid directly to the advocate.
Court’s Observations
When the matter came up again, the State did not dispute that Singh had joined the investigation. The prosecution’s main grievance was that no cash had been recovered through him.
The bench, however, was not persuaded by that argument alone. As the judges noted in open court, the appellant’s stand was consistent - he maintained that the cash was taken by the co-accused travel agent and not by him. The bench observed, in substance, that merely because an accused has not helped recover money which he claims he never received, it cannot automatically be said that he failed to cooperate with investigators.
There was also a brief discussion on the nature of professional transactions. The court appeared conscious of the fact that lawyers often receive fees through banking channels, and such transfers, by themselves, cannot be treated as proof of criminal intent without something more concrete.
Read also:- Supreme Court Reserves Verdict on Karnataka Land Acquisition Dispute Involving S.V. Global Mill
Decision
After considering the submissions, the Supreme Court decided to make its earlier interim protection permanent. The appeal was disposed of by granting anticipatory bail to Jaskanwar Singh, subject to clear conditions. He has been directed to cooperate with the investigation, appear for questioning whenever required, and submit bail bonds before the trial court within three weeks. He must also give an undertaking not to threaten witnesses or tamper with evidence. With these directions, the court closed the case before it.
Case Title: Jaskanwar Singh @ Jaskaran Singh vs State of Punjab
Case No.: Criminal Appeal No. ___of 2025 (arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 16440 of 2025)
Case Type: Criminal Appeal (Anticipatory Bail)
Decision Date: December 12, 2025
