IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 261 CRM-M-43502-2022 Date of decision: 15.09.2025 GURSIMRAN SINGH DUBB ......Petitioner VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER .......Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD S. BHARDWAJ ***** Present: - Mr. Navrajdeep Singh, Legal Aid Counsel for the petitioner. Mr. I.P.S Sabharwal, DAG, Punjab. Mr. Puneet Pali, Advocate for Mr. Mohd. Salim, Advocate for respondent No.2. ***** VINOD S. BHARDWAJ, J. (Oral) The present petition has been filed for seeking quashing of FIR No. 98 dated 31.05.2022 registered under Sections 279, 337, 338, 427, 304- A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Sections 212 and 506 of the IPC, Section 3(1) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities Act, 1989 were added later on) at Police Station Bhargo Camp, District Jalandhar and all subsequent proceeding arising of the same. Even though a written request for adjournment has been circulated on behalf of the Counsel for the petitioner, however, I do not find any valid reason for entertaining the said adjournment slip since Counsel for the petitioner had himself entered appearance in urgent matters in morning. VISHAL SHARMA 2025.09.16 18:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-43502-2022 -2- Besides, certain new developments have been informed by the State Counsel. Hence, it will not be appropriate to keep the matter pending. The present petition is accordingly being decided by appointment of a Legal Aid Counsel. Accordingly, Mr. Navrajdeep Singh, Advocate, is appointed as Legal Aid Counsel to assist this Court on behalf of the petitioner. Counsel contends that the present FIR has been lodged by concealing vital facts and notwithstanding that the offences in question were not made out. Learned State Counsel however, informs at this stage that during the pendency of the present petition, the petitioner had already been discharged by the trial Court vide order dated 06.12.2023. Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.2 pleads ignorance. Counsel for the petitioner, however, contends that in view of the aforesaid specific statement made by the State Counsel on instructions from Inspector Mohan Lal, the grievance would not survive any further. The present petition is accordingly disposed of as having been rendered infructuous. Copy of this order be sent to High Court Legal Service Committee for information and necessary action. (VINOD S. BHARDWAJ) SEPTEMBER 15, 2025 JUDGE Vishal Sharma Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No VISHAL SHARMA 2025.09.16 18:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document