Every few days, India’s courts decide cases that quietly shape the rules ordinary people live by — on bail, on marriage, on what the police can and cannot do. This digest brings you three recent developments from the Supreme Court of India and the Punjab & Haryana High Court, explained in plain language for the general reader, not lawyers.
Punjab & Haryana High Court Refuses Bail in ₹48-Lakh Visa Fraud Case
A man from Kurukshetra allegedly promised several families visas and jobs in the USA for ₹48 lakh, but instead sent them to Thailand, Kazakhstan, Russia and Dubai. The victims had paid ₹25 lakh in cash and handed over two security cheques of ₹12.5 lakh each, both of which bounced. On 24 September 2026, the Punjab & Haryana High Court, in an order by Justice Sanjay Vashisth, rejected the accused’s second bail application, observing that poor families in Haryana are being defrauded by false promises of foreign travel and that such conduct calls for stricter treatment as a deterrent.
Fraudulent “visa agents” are unfortunately common across Punjab and Haryana, where families often save for years to send a relative abroad. If you or someone you know has been cheated this way, both criminal action and a bail or anticipatory bail matter against the accused, as well as recovery of any bounced cheques, are legal remedies worth exploring.
Source: The Tribune
Supreme Court: Anti-Suit Injunction Cannot Block an NRI Couple’s UK Divorce Case
A couple married in Kolkata in 2018 later settled in the United Kingdom, where the wife filed for divorce citing an irretrievable breakdown of the marriage. The husband got an Indian trial court to pass an “anti-suit injunction” stopping her from pursuing the case in the UK. The Calcutta High Court set that order aside, and on 24 September 2026, the Supreme Court (Justices S.V.N. Bhatti and N.V. Anjaria) agreed, holding that an anti-suit injunction is an exceptional remedy that cannot be granted merely on the speculation that a foreign court’s decree might not be enforceable in India. Since both spouses’ home, finances and residence were in the UK, the Court found that was the natural place for the case to be heard.
For NRI families and couples living partly in India and partly abroad, this is a useful reminder that Indian courts will not casually block a spouse from pursuing divorce proceedings abroad just because the other spouse would prefer to fight the case in India — getting early advice on which country’s courts actually have jurisdiction matters a great deal in such cases.
Source: LiveLaw
Supreme Court Upholds ₹5 Lakh Compensation for Unlawful Arrest of Karnataka Homestay Owner
A homestay owner in Kodagu, Karnataka, was arrested in April 2026 in connection with an alleged case involving a foreign tourist and spent 13 days in judicial custody before being released on bail. The Karnataka High Court later found the arrest itself was unlawful, noting that the accused had no direct role in the alleged offence and that the charges against him were weak, and ordered the state to pay him ₹5 lakh in compensation. Karnataka challenged this before the Supreme Court, but on 22 September 2026, a bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta refused to interfere and dismissed the state’s plea.
This case is a good reminder that the police cannot arrest a person without following proper procedure and having genuine grounds to do so, and that courts can and will order compensation when they fail to. Anyone who believes a family member was arrested without proper cause should speak to a criminal lawyer about the options available.
Source: LiveLaw
If you’re dealing with a similar situation — a bail matter, a cross-border matrimonial dispute, or a question about a wrongful arrest — feel free to get in touch with our office for a confidential discussion.
This digest is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Advocate Sukhdeep Singh Khaira & Associates, Patiala.