CRM-M-58593-2025 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 143 CRM-M-58593-2025 Decided on: 08.07.2026 Rajdeep Singh …...Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and another …...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH Present: Mr. Ashutosh Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Pawan Kumar Garg, AAG Haryana **** SANJAY VASHISTH, J. (ORAL) 1. Prayer in this petition, filed under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023 for quashing of FIR No.204 dated 05.07.2024, registered under Sections 406 and 420 IPC at Police Station Baldev Nagar, District Ambala and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per investigation, his role is only of purchasing of stamp papers over which agreement between two persons of giving of assurance to get employment in the High Court, in lieu of receiving of some amount was executed. After investigation of the case, petitioner has been challaned as one of the accused. 3. Argument addressed by counsel for the petitioner is that except of the purchase of stamp paper over which the agreement was written no other role is assigned and, therefore, merely by purchasing of the stamp paper, his culpability cannot be determined, thus, has been wrongly challaned. REENA 2026.07.10 09:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-58593-2025 2 4. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner and examining the role, this Court is of the prima facie view that apart from the complainant-Chetan Bhardwaj, petitioner-Rajdeep Singh was the only person involved in the transaction that tarnished the image of this sacred institution i.e. Punjab and Haryana High Court. At this stage, it can not be conclusively decided that petitioner- Rajdeep Singh is completely innocent. Given that counsel for the petitioner admits that petitioner had purchased the stamp papers and was present at the time, he can not run away from the liability or claim that he had no connection to the illegal deal. Rather, by purchasing the stamp papers, the petitioner has established on record that he is also one of the interested party. Whether or not he received any monetary gain remains a matter to be determined during the trial after the examination of witnesses. 5. Thus, present petition is dismissed. (SANJAY VASHISTH) 08.07.2026 JUDGE reena Whether Speaking/Reasoned: YES/NO Whether Reportable: YES/NO REENA 2026.07.10 09:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh