CRM-M-30602-2021 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 271 CRM-M-30602-2021 Date of decision : 14.07.2026 Lokender Singh and others ... Petitioners Versus State of Haryana ... Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S.GREWAL Present:- None for the petitioners. Mr. Vipul Sherwal, AAG, Haryana. *** H.S. Grewal, J.(Oral) 1. This petition has been filed under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 (erstwhile Section 482 Cr.P.C.) seeking quashing of FIR No.185 dated 02.12.2020, registered under Section 420 IPC and Sections 75, 73 and 66-D of IT Act, at Police Station Cyber Crime Gurugram, District Gurugram alongwith all consequential proceedings arising therefrom. 2. On the last date of hearing, no one had appeared on behalf of the petitioners and the matter was adjourned with a specific observation that no further adjournment shall be granted. 3. Even today, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioners. 4. Learned State counsel submits that there are specific allegations against the petitioners and the pleas raised in this petition involve disputed questions of fact which can only be examined by the learned trial Court after the parties lead their respective evidence. It is also submitted that the trial is SONIA GUGNANI 2026.07.17 13.41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-30602-2021 -2- already underway and 03 out of the 16 cited prosecution witnesses have already been examined. He, therefore, submits that there is no merit in the present petition and the same deserves to be dismissed. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. A perusal of the FIR and the material placed on record reveals that the controversy raised by the petitioners involves disputed questions of fact, which necessarily require appreciation of evidence and the same cannot be adjudicated upon while exercising inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. (now Section 528 BNSS). 7. Moreover, the trial has already commenced and 03 out of the 16 cited prosecution witnesses have been examined. In such circumstances, interference by this Court at this stage is unwarranted. Consequently, finding no merit in the present petition, the same is hereby dismissed. 8. However, the petitioners would be at liberty to raise all pleas before the learned trial Court at the appropriate stage. (H.S.GREWAL) 14.07.2026 JUDGE Sonia Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No SONIA GUGNANI 2026.07.17 13.41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh