Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2025 DAILYLAW 77309 (PNJ)

LAKHBIR SINGH AND OTHERS v. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER

CRM-M/37206/2019 · 2025-05-05

H S Grewal

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

204 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-37206-2019 (O&M) Date of Decision: 05.05.2025 Lakhbir Singh and Others ....Petitioners Versus State Of Punjab and Another ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S. GREWAL Present:- Mr. Sandeep Godara, Advocate for Mr. A.P.S. Rehan, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Manveer Singh Toor, AAG, Punjab. Mr. Daljeet Singh Randhawa, Advocate and Mr. A.S. Manaise, Advocate for respondent No.2. **** H.S. GREWAL, J (ORAL) 1. This petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR No.64 dated 28.11.2018 registered under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B of IPC at Police Station Kotli Surat Mallian, Police District Batala, District Gurdaspur. 2. On the ground that earlier a complaint made by the complainant before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Batala against the petitioners being treated as a private complaint was disposed of. Thereafter, a complete perusal of the facts shows that the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Batala vide the impugned order dated 15.12.2016 discharged the accused persons in the present case. Subsequently it is stated that the husband of the complainant namely Subeg Singh has got this FIR registered on the same facts, but without disclosing about complaint filed earlier before the learned JMIC for the same cause of action and about its fate. Perusal of the order dated 15.12.2016 shows that the agreements in PRINCE CHAWLA 2025.05.29 18:39 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-37206-2019 (O&M) -2- that case which were in question were dated 27.07.2009, 23.09.2004 and 23.08.2009. However, in the present FIR, the sentence is regarding an agreement dated 21.10.2010 which has been forged and fabricated. Although these cases are totally different but both the parties are same. Moreover, the disputed question of facts are involved in this FIR which can be heard by this Court. 3. Dismissed. 4. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, stand disposed of accordingly as well. (H.S. GREWAL) JUDGE 05.05.2025 Prince Chawla Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No. Whether reportable : Yes/No. PRINCE CHAWLA 2025.05.29 18:39 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document