CRM-M-54167-2023 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-54167-2023 Date of Decision: 16.07.2026 Uploaded on: 16.07.2026 KULDEEP KAUR ... Petitioner Versus STATE OF PUNJAB & ANOTHER ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI Present: Mr. Pawan Kumar, Advocate and Mr. Vishwanath Partap Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Adeshwar Pannu, Asstt. A.G., Punjab. Mr. Arav Gupta, Advocate (Amicus Curiae) with Ms. Ashmeet Kaur Shah, Advocate for respondent No.2. **** JASJIT SINGH BEDI, J. The prayer in the present petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. is for quashing of FIR No.19 dated 27.01.2023 registered under Sections 307, 148, 149, 506, 109, 201, 120-B IPC, 1860 and Sections 25, 25-A, 27, 29-A, 54 & 59 of Arms Act at Police Station Cantonment, Amritsar, Punjab along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom. 2. The present FIR came to be registered at the instance of Sandeep Kaur W/o Naunihal Singh and the same reads as under:- Statement of Sandeep Kaur Wife of Naunihal Singh resident of House No. 2593, Block-A, Friends Avenue, Gurudwara Palah Sahib Road, Amritsar, aged about 49 years, Mobile No. 9914705153, stated that I am resident of above mentioned address and is a JITESH LAL 2026.07.16 17:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-54167-2023 -2- teacher. I have two daughters, elder is Amandeep Kaur and younger to her is Harsirat Kaur. Rajpinder Singh son of Amarjit Singh resident of Village Sohal, now residing in Amritsar City on rent used to harass my daughter Amandeep Kaur. Regarding that earlier also I got registered an FIR No. 107/22 at Police Station Cantonment, in that case he is on bail. After that also Rajpinder Singh did not stop harassing my daughter. My daughter Amandeep Kaur told me that when she goes to market he threatens her that I will kill you. For the last two days he has been intentionally abusing her while roaming on motorcycle. Today, time would be about 5.15 pm that I was standing in the balcony of my house then Rajpinder Singh along with his friend came outside our house on the motorcycle driven by his friend and Rajpinder Singh was pillion rider and they stopped their motorcycle outside our house, after alighting from the motorcycle Rajpinder Singh rang the bell of our house then my daughter Amandeep Kaur opened the gate then Rajpinder Singh said that today I will kill you and after taking out a pistol from his waist he fired a direct shot on my daughter with an intention to kill, which hit above her waist. To save herself my daughter ran away inside the house, then he fired thrice, which hit on the backside of neck of my daughter, then after firing Rajpinder Singh and his friend ran away from the spot while giving threats and due to fire arm injuries my daughter fell on the ground, after arranging a vehicle we got her admitted in Amandeep Hospital, where she is under treatment. He has done this incident on the instigation of his mother father Amarjit Singh and brother Sukhwinder Singh. Rajpinder Singh used to say that nobody can harm me because my father is a policeman. Therefore, Rajpinder Singh in connivance with his friend and on the Instigation of his parents and brother caused fire arm injuries to my daughter Amandeep Kaur with an intention to kill. Kindly legal action be taken against them. Statement has been recorded, heard and is correct. Sd/- Sandeep Kaur, signed in Punjabi, 99147-05153, verified by Kulwant Singh ASI Incharge Police Post Gumtala, Amritsar dated 27.01.2023.” JITESH LAL 2026.07.16 17:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-54167-2023 -3- 3. On conclusion of the investigation the final report was submitted against Rajpinder Singh, Amarjit Singh, Sukhwinder Singh and petitioner- Kuldeep Kaur whereas juvenile accused Menmehtab Singh was to be tried by the Juvenile Justice Board, Amritsar. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case only because she is the mother of the main accused Rajpinder Singh. She was neither present at the place of the occurrence nor has any injury been attributed to her. In fact, Naunihal Singh, the husband of Sandeep Kaur (complainant/respondent No.1) and father of Amoldeep Kaur had given knife injuries to Rajpinder Singh because of which Amarjit Singh (father of Rajpinder Singh) had got registered an FIR No.67/2022 dated 13.03.2022 under Section 307 IPC, P.S. Cantonment, Amritsar. Amoldeep Kaur got registered an FIR No.107/2022 under Section 354 IPC, P.S. Cantonment, Amritsar against Rajpinder Singh on account of these FIRs and with a view to falsely implicate the petitioner her name has been incorporated in the FIR but the challan has been filed without any evidence. He, therefore, prays that the FIR and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom be quashed qua the petitioner. 5. On the other hand, the learned State counsel along with the learned Amicus Curiae contend that a bare perusal of the FIR would reveal that Rajpinder Singh committed the offence on the instigation of his parents and brother. During the course of the investigation, the supplementary statement of the complainant was recorded wherein she stated that prior to the registration of the instant FIR, she had gone to the house of the accused JITESH LAL 2026.07.16 17:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-54167-2023 -4- Rajpinder Singh for making a complaint where his mother Kuldeep Kaur (petitioner), father Amarjit Singh and brother Sukhwinder Singh told her that their son (Rajpinder Singh) would trouble her daughter and she could do what she wanted to do. The statement of Amoldeep Kaur (injured victim) has also been recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. where she has corroborated the allegations levelled in the FIR and has specifically stated that the accused Rajpinder Singh had committed the offence in conspiracy with his father Amarjit Singh, mother Kuldeep Kaur and brother Sukhwinder Singh. In fact, Amarjit Singh provided a weapon to his son Rajpinder Singh and after the occurrence deposited the same with a gun house ante-dating the date of the deposit. For the said purpose, Pawan Bhatia (owner of the Gun House) has been nominated as an accused and Sections 465, 468 and 471 IPC have been incorporated in the present FIR. The motive also lies with not only Rajpinder Singh but also with his mother Kuldeep Kaur and father Amarjit Singh as Rajpinder Singh had been attacked by Naunihal Singh, the husband the present complainant/Sandeep Kaur and Amoldeep Kaur had got registered an FIR under Section 354 IPC against Rajpinder Singh. As the evidence collected by the Investigating Agency prima facie makes out the culpability of the petitioner, the question of quashing of the FIR does not arise. 6. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. 7. A perusal of the FIR and the supplementary statement of the complainant would reveal that both Kuldeep Kaur and Amarjit Singh, the parents of the main accused Rajpinder Singh were actively acting in concert with their son to commit the offences in question. Amarjit Singh has handed JITESH LAL 2026.07.16 17:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-54167-2023 -5- over his weapon to Rajpinder Singh to be used in the occurrence. The said weapon was deposited later on with a gun house showing it had been deposited prior to the occurrence. The son of the petitioner Rajpinder Singh was attacked by Naunihal Singh, the father of Amoldeep Kaur. An FIR also stands registered at the instance of Amoldeep Kaur against Rajpinder Singh under Section 354 IPC. When the accused persons fled to Delhi, the room in the Gurdwara from where they were apprehended was booked in the name of the petitioner. Apparently, the role of the petitioner stands prima facie established. At this stage, it cannot be said that there is no material available on record against the petitioner. 8. Keeping in view the aforementioned facts and circumstances of the present case, I find no merit in the present petition. Therefore, the same stands dismissed. 9. However, the observations made hereinabove are only for the purposes of deciding the present petition and the Trial Court is free to adjudicate upon the matter on the basis of the evidence led before it uninfluenced by any such observations made herein. (JASJIT SINGH BEDI) JUDGE 16.07.2026 JITESH Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No Whether reportable:- Yes/No JITESH LAL 2026.07.16 17:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document