CRM-M-29978 123 Gulshan @ Gulshan Kumar State of Haryana CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL Present: Shalini Singh Nagpal 1. Sanhita, 2023 bearing CRR No.6 of 2026 titled a time bound manner dated 01.10.2014, Police Station City Thanesar, pending before learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kurukshetra. 2. dated 01.10.2014 members under case, trial was near conclusion and was arguments. Cros dated 21.10.2014 under but the police cancelled the case and filed cancellation report. Petitioner filed a protest petition against the cancellatio on 31.10.202 Kurukshetra before learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kurukshetra. The prayer in the 29978-2026 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Gulshan @ Gulshan Kumar VERSUS Haryana and others CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL Mr. Kushagra Beniwal, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Vikas Bhardwaj, AAG, Haryana *** Shalini Singh Nagpal, J.(Oral) The petition under Section 528 of Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, has been filed to direct the revisional court to decide revision bearing CRR No.6 of 2026 titled ‘Gulshan vs. Suresh Kumar and a time bound manner, before passing of final judgment in case FIR No.700 dated 01.10.2014, Police Station City Thanesar, pending before learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kurukshetra. Learned counsel for the petitioner 01.10.2014 was registered against the petitioners and his family under Sections 148, 149, 323, 324, 341 trial was near conclusion and was fixed . Cross version of the case was also registered vide FIR No.744 dated 21.10.2014 under Sections 148, 149, 323, 324, 325, 447 and 506 IPC but the police cancelled the case and filed cancellation report. Petitioner filed a protest petition against the cancellatio on 31.10.2025. Revision petition against the order of learned CJM dated 31.10.2025 was filed on 08.01.2025 and before learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kurukshetra. The prayer in the 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-29978-2026 (O&M) Date of decision: 15.07.2026 Petitioner Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Vikas Bhardwaj, AAG, Haryana. Section 528 of Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha , has been filed to direct the revisional court to decide revision ‘Gulshan vs. Suresh Kumar and others’ in before passing of final judgment in case FIR No.700 dated 01.10.2014, Police Station City Thanesar, District Kurukshetra, pending before learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kurukshetra. the petitioner submits that FIR No.700 was registered against the petitioners and his family 148, 149, 323, 324, 341, 325 and 506 IPC. In that fixed for defence evidence and was also registered vide FIR No.744 Sections 148, 149, 323, 324, 325, 447 and 506 IPC but the police cancelled the case and filed cancellation report. Petitioner filed a protest petition against the cancellation report which was dismissed against the order of learned CJM, dated 31.10.2025 was filed on 08.01.2025 and was pending before learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kurukshetra. The prayer in the M) .2026 Petitioner Respondents Section 528 of Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha , has been filed to direct the revisional court to decide revision in before passing of final judgment in case FIR No.700 Kurukshetra, submits that FIR No.700 was registered against the petitioners and his family n that r defence evidence and was also registered vide FIR No.744 Sections 148, 149, 323, 324, 325, 447 and 506 IPC but the police cancelled the case and filed cancellation report. Petitioner n report which was dismissed , pending before learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kurukshetra. The prayer in the KAPIL 2026.07.16 19:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-29978 petition is for a the criminal revision before the judgment in FIR No.700 dated 01.10.2014 pronounced. Further that final judgment in 3. 4. of official respondents was facing trial was 12 year old and needed to be decided expeditiously, therefore, no order for 5. and the cross version have to be decided together findings. Trial in the and is fixed for def that the revisional court seized of the revision petition 31.10.2025 of learned CJM, Kurukshetra revision petition expeditiously Ordered accordingly. 6. the revisional court for early hearing of the petition and may press his prayer for stay of the trial 7. 15.07.2026 Kapil 29978-2026 (O&M) for a direction to the revisional court for expeditiou the criminal revision before the judgment in FIR No.700 dated 01.10.2014 pronounced. Further that final judgment in the Notice to the official respondents only. Mr. Vikas Bhardwaj, AAG, Haryana of official respondents-State. He submits that was facing trial was 12 year old and needed to be decided expeditiously, no order for staying the trial in the FIR As per settled principles of law, the FIR against the petitioners and the cross version have to be decided together . Trial in the FIR No.700 dated 01.10.2014 and is fixed for defence evidence and arguments. It is that the revisional court seized of the revision petition of learned CJM, Kurukshetra should revision petition expeditiously, preferably wit Ordered accordingly. The petitioner would be entitled to move an application before the revisional court for early hearing of the petition and may press his prayer stay of the trial against him before that court. The petition stands disposed of. Whether Speaking/Reasoned : Whether Reportable : 2 direction to the revisional court for expeditious disposal of the criminal revision before the judgment in FIR No.700 dated 01.10.2014 is the FIR be stayed. Notice to the official respondents only. hardwaj, AAG, Haryana, accepts notice on behalf bmits that the FIR in which the petitioner was facing trial was 12 year old and needed to be decided expeditiously, staying the trial in the FIR may be passed. of law, the FIR against the petitioners and the cross version have to be decided together to avoid contradictory FIR No.700 dated 01.10.2014 has reached at final stage ence evidence and arguments. It is, therefore, required that the revisional court seized of the revision petition challening order dated should be directed to decide the preferably within a period of two months. The petitioner would be entitled to move an application before the revisional court for early hearing of the petition and may press his prayer ourt. ition stands disposed of. (SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL) JUDGE Whether Speaking/Reasoned : Yes/No Yes/No disposal of is , accepts notice on behalf FIR in which the petitioner was facing trial was 12 year old and needed to be decided expeditiously, of law, the FIR against the petitioners to avoid contradictory has reached at final stage , required order dated be directed to decide the hin a period of two months. The petitioner would be entitled to move an application before the revisional court for early hearing of the petition and may press his prayer (SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL) KAPIL 2026.07.16 19:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document