COCP-3409-2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 219 COCP-3409-2025 Date of decision : 13.08.2025 Baljit Kaur ...... Petitioner versus Ajay Gandhi ...... Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ JAIN Present: Mr. Manpreet Singh Dua, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Ishan Kaushal, AAG, Punjab. **** PANKAJ JAIN, J. (Oral) 1. Status report by way of affidavit of Ajay Gandhi, IPS, Senior Superintendent of Police, District Moga has been filed. The same is taken on record. 2. The steps taken by the police authorities have been spelled out in the same which read as under:- “4. That on the perusal of the record, the following points have come on record, which are stated herein below for the kind perusal of this Hon'ble Court:- I. That the present petitioner has filed the present contempt petition with the allegation that the representation dated 16.08.2024 (Annexure P-3 with CRM-M-46033-2024) has not been decided by the Moga police/deponent in compliance of order dated 01.04.2025 passed in CRM-M-46033-2024. II. That on the perusal of the record and procuring the report dated 05-08-2025 from the complaint branch/PC branch, it has been found that the representation dated 16.08.2024 (Annexure P-3 with CRM-M-46033-2024) has not been received by the Senior Superintendent of Police office by post or by hand or any other mode. DINESH KUMAR 2025.08.20 17:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document COCP-3409-2025 III. On the other hand, to comply with the above said order dated 01.04.2025 of the Hon'ble Court, the representation attached as Annexure P-3 with the copy of the petition was taken on record and the said representation procured from the copy of the petition, was marked to be inquired on merits to the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sub-Division City Moga, in accordance with law. IV. That in the aforesaid representation dated 16.08.2024, the petitioner-Baljit Kaurhas raised allegations that her son, now deceased, namely Satnam Singh, was married to Gurpreet Kaur (daughter-in-law of the petitioner) on 12.12.2020, and the couple was residing in rented accommodation in the house of one Ranjit Singh. The petitioner-Baljit Kaur further alleged that her daughter-in-law, Gurpreet Kaur, was involved in an illicit relationship with the said Ranjit Singh, who was the owner/landlord of the said premises. Thus, both of them, in furtherance of a pre-planned conspiracy, murdered her son, Satnam Singh. V. That during the inquiry of the said representation dated 16.08.2024 (Annexure P-3) the inquiry officer called for the complete record and it was found that on 16.07.2024 deceased Satnam Singh commit suicide by hanging himself from the ceiling fan and on the statement of the present petitioner the proceedings under Section 194 BNSS were conducted, in accordance with law. The present petitioner stated in her statement recorded at that time, has stated that the deceased Satnam Singh has ended his life by hanging himself due to his illness i e. depression in which no one is to be blamed and the present petitioner did not want to take any legal action against anyone. The aforesaid statement was recorded during the proceeding under Section 194 BNSS, which was duly confirmed by the husband of the present petitioner namely Sukhminder Singh and her daughter in law namely Gurpreet Kaur. VI. That during the inquiry of the present representation, the statements of the petitioner Baljit Kaur, Gurpreet Kaur (daughter-in-law), Ranjit Singh (owner of the house), and a joint statement of members of the locality were recorded Ranjit Singh in his statement stated that he is a married man DINESH KUMAR 2025.08.20 17:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document COCP-3409-2025 with two children and owns two houses. He further clarified that one of his houses was rented to Gurpreet Kaur and her husband, Satnam Singh (now deceased), while he resides with his own family in the other house. VII. That on 15.07.2024, the deceased Satnam Singh hanged himself from the fan in the house and he has stated that the present petitioner has filed a false complaint against Ranjit Singh, which is entirely baseless and unfounded, as Ranjit Singh was employed at a poultry farm and would leave for work in the morning and return only during the night hours. VIII. That Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sub-Division City Moga, District Moga has prepared his report No. 387,390, 434-Liti dated 10.05.2025 after considering the various statements recorded in connection with the aforesaid case, along with the technical and documentary evidence on record, it was found that the deceased Satnam Singh and Gurpreet Kaur had solemnized a love marriage and had started residing in Chandigarh. Due to this, the present petitioner and her husband used to have frequent disputes with the deceased Satnam Singh. IX. That Satnam Singh (now deceased) was suffering from mental trauma and depression due to which he hanged himself from a ceiling fan and allegation leveled by the present petitioner in the aforesaid representation in regard to the illicit relationship of Gurpreet Kaur and Ranjit Singh has neither supported with any evidence nor any fact has come to the light during the investigation about the alleged illicit relationship, Thus, as per the report dated 10.05.2025 of the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sub-Division City Moga, no truth/merits were found in the aforesaid representation wherein it was recommended that the representation dated 16.08.2024 be consigned to the record room. X. That vide Report No. 1726-M/R/SP(1) dated 6-08- 2025the Superintendent of Police, (Investigation), Moga has stated that the postmortem/LR having No. ASM/10/2024 dated 16.07.2024 was examined and as per the report there are ligature marks which are described in the MLR/postmortem report as follow- “….Ligature Mark DINESH KUMAR 2025.08.20 17:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document COCP-3409-2025 Ligature mark present in the form of groove measuring 31x1.5cm over the front and sides of the neck starting 6cm from below the left ear to 2cm below the right ear and 7cm from the chin. The mark is crossing the thyroid cartilage. Margins of the groove are abraded. On dissection, there are subcutaneous hemorrhages beneath the ligature mark. Petechial hemorrhages noted. Lymph nodes above the ligature mark are congested. Trachea and larynx are congested. Froth present in trachea…" XI. That on the further perusal of the medical record, the opinion of the doctor was sought and the cause of death after analyzing entire medical record given by the doctors, is as follow:- "... Opinion Cause of Death Death in this case in my opinion is due to asphyxia due to hanging which is ante mortem and sufficient to cause death in an ordinary course of nature…" On the perusal of the postmortem, medical record and the opinion of the doctor, when corroborated with the proceeding under Section 194 BNSS and the statements recorded by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sub-Division City Moga, it was found by the Superintendent of Police, (Investigation), Moga, that the present case was a case of suicide and on the other hand, no suicide note was found or any other evidence was found which points out towards the abetment to suicide or murder. Thus, the said representation dated 16.08.2024 (Annexure P-3) was recommended to be consigned to record room being devoid on merits. The copy of the post mortem report is attached as Annexure R-1. XII. That thereafter, the deponent has perused the above said reports and have also considered the record and has found that the findings in the reports of the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sub- Division City Moga as well as Superintendent of Police, (Investigation), Moga wereon the basis of the evidence on record and no material was there to show that the unfortunate death of deceased Satnam Singh was a result of an abetment to suicide or murder. Thus, the representation dated 16.08.2024 (Annexure P-3) was decided accordingly and was DINESH KUMAR 2025.08.20 17:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document COCP-3409-2025 directed to be consigned to the record room being devoid on merits.” 3. In view thereof, this Court finds that no further order is required to be passed. However, the petitioner shall be at liberty to avail their remedies in accordance with law. 4. Disposed off, accordingly. (PANKAJ JAIN) JUDGE 13.08.2025 Dinesh Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes Whether Reportable : No DINESH KUMAR 2025.08.20 17:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document