CRM-M-39584 154 Baljeet Kaur and another State of Punjab and others CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL Present: Shalini Singh Nagpal, 1. direction to off 02.04.2026, under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 351(2), 191(3), 190 of BNS Police Station Lehra, District having failed to invoke Sections 118(2) and 117(4) of BNS 2. was lodged on complaint of petitioners, respondents. Gri invoked only Section 115(2) moved to Senior Su 173(4) BNS but no action was taken thereon. 3. 4. accepts notice on behalf of the official respondents ASI Satgur Singh 39584-2026 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Baljeet Kaur and another VERSUS State of Punjab and others CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL Mr. Ashok Bhardwaj, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Sukhbeer Singh, DAG, Punjab *** Shalini Singh Nagpal, J.(Oral) The petition under Section 528 of BNSS official respondents to transfer investigation of FIR No.83 dated 02.04.2026, under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 351(2), 191(3), 190 of BNS Police Station Lehra, District Sangrur, respondent No.4 failed to invoke Sections 118(2) and 117(4) of BNS Learned counsel for the petitioner ged on complaint of petitioners, respondents. Grievous injuries were caused to the petitioners but the police invoked only Section 115(2) of BNS. Representation Senior Superintendent of Police, Sangrur 173(4) BNS but no action was taken thereon. Notice of motion to official respon Mr. Sukhbeer Singh, DAG, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of the official respondents Singh, submits that there was no opinion of the doctor declaring 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-39584-2026 (O&M) Date of decision: 20.07.2026 Petitioners Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL dvocate for the petitioners. Mr. Sukhbeer Singh, DAG, Punjab. Section 528 of BNSS has been filed for a investigation of FIR No.83 dated 02.04.2026, under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 351(2), 191(3), 190 of BNS, respondent No.4/Investigation Officer failed to invoke Sections 118(2) and 117(4) of BNS. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that aforesaid FIR ged on complaint of petitioners, regarding assault by private evous injuries were caused to the petitioners but the police . Representation, Annexure P-7 was perintendent of Police, Sangrur in terms of Section 173(4) BNS but no action was taken thereon. motion to official respondents. Mr. Sukhbeer Singh, DAG, Punjab, who is present in Court, accepts notice on behalf of the official respondents. He, on instructions from there was no opinion of the doctor declaring M) .2026 s Respondents a investigation of FIR No.83 dated , /Investigation Officer aforesaid FIR private evous injuries were caused to the petitioners but the police 7 was in terms of Section who is present in Court, on instructions from there was no opinion of the doctor declaring KAPIL 2026.07.20 19:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-39584 the injury grievous, therefore only Section 115(2) BNS was invoked. He prayed for dismissal of present petition. 5. U.P. and others, (2008) 2 SCC 409, Hemant Yashwant Dhage and others, (2016) 6 SCC the High Courts are flooded with writ petitions praying for registration of the first information report or praying for proper investigation and that if the High Courts entertain such writ pe be able to do any other work except dealing with such writ petitions. Therefore, the complainant must avail of his alternate remedy to approach the Magistrate concerned under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C and if he does so Magistrate will ensure, if prima facie he is satisfied, registration of the first information report and also ensure a proper investigation in the matter, and he can also monitor the investigation. 6. unfair or tainted. to the petitioner accordance with law. 7. 20.07.2026 Kapil 39584-2026 (O&M) the injury grievous, therefore only Section 115(2) BNS was invoked. He prayed for dismissal of present petition. Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in U.P. and others, (2008) 2 SCC 409, and t Yashwant Dhage and others, (2016) 6 SCC the High Courts are flooded with writ petitions praying for registration of the first information report or praying for proper investigation and that if the High Courts entertain such writ petitions, they will be flooded and may not be able to do any other work except dealing with such writ petitions. Therefore, the complainant must avail of his alternate remedy to approach the Magistrate concerned under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C and if he does so Magistrate will ensure, if prima facie he is satisfied, registration of the first information report and also ensure a proper investigation in the matter, and he can also monitor the investigation. There is no reason to believe that investigation of the case is tainted. Accordingly, the petition is to the petitioners to avail alternative remedies available to accordance with law. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. Whether Speaking/Reasoned : Whether Reportable : 2 the injury grievous, therefore only Section 115(2) BNS was invoked. He Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Sakiri Vasu vs. State of and Sudhir Bhaskarrao Tambe v. t Yashwant Dhage and others, (2016) 6 SCC 277, has observed that the High Courts are flooded with writ petitions praying for registration of the first information report or praying for proper investigation and that if the titions, they will be flooded and may not be able to do any other work except dealing with such writ petitions. Therefore, the complainant must avail of his alternate remedy to approach the Magistrate concerned under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C and if he does so, the Magistrate will ensure, if prima facie he is satisfied, registration of the first information report and also ensure a proper investigation in the matter, and There is no reason to believe that investigation of the case is the petition is hereby disposed of with liberty alternative remedies available to them, in Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. (SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL) JUDGE Whether Speaking/Reasoned : Yes/No Yes/No the injury grievous, therefore only Section 115(2) BNS was invoked. He Sakiri Vasu vs. State of Sudhir Bhaskarrao Tambe v. 277, has observed that the High Courts are flooded with writ petitions praying for registration of the first information report or praying for proper investigation and that if the titions, they will be flooded and may not be able to do any other work except dealing with such writ petitions. Therefore, the complainant must avail of his alternate remedy to approach , the Magistrate will ensure, if prima facie he is satisfied, registration of the first information report and also ensure a proper investigation in the matter, and There is no reason to believe that investigation of the case is disposed of with liberty in (SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL) KAPIL 2026.07.20 19:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document