(MOHALI, PUNJAB) – A court order directing Suresh Malik and Simran Malik to appear by June 11, 2026 has moved a ₹2.10 crore alleged Canada permanent residence fraud case into a more serious procedural stage: possible declaration as proclaimed offenders. That process matters in any criminal case where accused persons do not appear, because it gives the court a formal path to compel attendance and, in many cases, to intensify enforcement.

The Mohali proceedings stem from a complaint filed at the NRI police station by Gagandeep Goyal of Kharar. He alleged the couple promised Canadian permanent residency through an asserted contact at the Canadian embassy, collected payments in installments totaling about ₹2.10 crore, and later sent forged approvals and documents through online portals and WhatsApp. The documents were allegedly found to be fake on verification.

Published reports also state that anticipatory bail pleas filed by the couple were dismissed by Additional District and Sessions Judge Hardeep Singh. Police then pasted a proclamation notice at their residence. If they do not appear by the court’s deadline, the court may formally declare them proclaimed offenders.

This article explains the process that usually follows in Indian criminal courts when police allege that accused persons are avoiding investigation or court process. The published report does not identify the exact charging sections beyond saying the case was registered under the Immigration Act and other relevant provisions. That missing detail matters, because the precise consequences can vary with the offenses charged and the stage of the case.

The allegation itself is familiar in overseas migration fraud complaints. A person is told that a private intermediary can secure Canadian PR through unofficial contacts, fast approvals, or embassy access. Money is paid in stages. Screenshots, portal entries, visa letters, and WhatsApp messages are then used to create an appearance of progress. None of those materials, standing alone, proves that an application is genuine.

Canadian permanent residence is processed through official government systems. A private person cannot lawfully guarantee approval by claiming embassy contacts. Where forged letters, fake file numbers, or false portal screenshots are used, complainants may have both a criminal fraud issue and an immigration documentation problem that requires separate legal review.

1. Complaint and registration of the case. The process usually starts with a police complaint and registration of a criminal case. Here, the complaint was filed at the Mohali NRI police station. In an immigration fraud matter, police typically collect payment records, chats, call logs, receipts, bank transfers, draft agreements, passport copies, and any visa or PR documents shown to the complainant.

Documents commonly reviewed at this stage: complaint statement, bank records, WhatsApp chats, screenshots of online portals, alleged approval letters, identity documents, and proof of meetings or payments. A mismatch between official records and the documents shown to the complainant often becomes central evidence.

2. Investigation and notice to join. After registration, police usually call the accused to join the investigation. That may include questioning, production of records, and forensic review of digital material. If the accused do not cooperate or remain unavailable, investigators may ask the court for stronger process. Reports in this case say the couple did not join the investigation.

3. Bail stage. An accused person who fears arrest may seek anticipatory bail. That appears to have happened here, and the pleas were dismissed. A dismissal does not decide guilt, but it often changes the litigation posture immediately because the accused loses that layer of protection against arrest. After a failed anticipatory bail attempt, appearance and cooperation usually become more urgent.

4. Proclamation notice. When a court is satisfied that an accused is absconding or avoiding process, it may issue a proclamation requiring appearance on a stated date. Indian criminal courts have long used this procedure in absconding cases. Reports say a proclamation notice was pasted at the couple’s residence, which is a common step used to record public notice.

5. Appearance by the court’s deadline. The critical decision point is simple: appear or do not appear. If Suresh Malik and Simran Malik appear by June 11, the court can decide the next procedural step, which may include custody, fresh bail litigation, or directions to cooperate with the investigation. If they do not appear, the court may record the non-appearance and move toward formally declaring them proclaimed offenders.

6. Formal declared status. Once a proclaimed-offender finding is entered, the case usually becomes harder to contain. Courts may permit more coercive action, and police may seek additional measures to trace assets or locate the accused, depending on the offenses and procedural posture. That status also tends to weigh heavily against later arguments that the accused were always available.

7. Possible follow-on steps. In many cases, police may seek attachment of property, deeper financial tracing, or wider circulation of the accused’s details. The exact route depends on the charging sections, the court’s orders, and whether any cross-border component exists. The published report does not identify the exact statutory provisions, so any case-specific prediction would be unsafe.

Several documents often decide whether a fraud case strengthens or weakens. The first is proof of payment. A complainant with bank transfers, signed receipts, or account statements usually presents a stronger record than one who paid in cash without acknowledgment. The second is the document trail showing what was promised: messages about guaranteed Canadian PR, embassy contacts, or fixed approval timelines may become important. The third is authenticity review. If alleged visa or PR papers fail verification, that can sharply change both criminal exposure and defense strategy.

People accused in immigration fraud cases often make avoidable errors. Some rely on informal assurances from intermediaries instead of appearing in court. Some submit inconsistent explanations about who received the money. Some delete chats, which can create evidentiary problems if recovery later shows missing material. Complainants make mistakes too. They sometimes surrender original papers, fail to preserve phone backups, or wait too long to obtain certified bank records.

Anyone drawn into a Canada-linked fraud allegation should separate three issues immediately: the criminal case, the authenticity of any immigration filing, and any money-recovery options. Those are different tracks. A criminal court addresses alleged offenses. Immigration counsel can review whether any genuine Canadian filing exists. Civil recovery or compensation options depend on the record, the assets, and local procedure.

Attorney assistance becomes especially important where there are large payments, allegations of forged documents, multiple victims, digital evidence, or non-appearance issues. If an accused person has already missed a notice or had anticipatory bail denied, local criminal counsel should review the court file without delay. If a complainant handed over passports, identity records, or educational documents, immigration counsel may also need to check whether those papers were misused in any filing.

The reported Mohali matter remains at a procedural stage. A proclamation process is not a conviction. The prosecution still bears the burden of proving the allegations in court, and the defense retains the right to contest the complaint, the evidence, and the alleged document trail. What changes now is the urgency created by the court’s appearance deadline.

⚖️ Legal Disclaimer: This article provides general information about immigration law and is not legal advice. Immigration cases are highly fact-specific, and laws vary by jurisdiction. Consult a qualified immigration attorney for advice about your specific situation.

Resources:
[AILA Lawyer Referral](https://www.aila.org/find-a-lawyer)
Immigration Advocates Network