A petition for quashing an FIR is not maintainable immediately after the dismissal of an anticipatory bail plea without a material change in circumstances. Such attempts constitute an abuse of process, particularly when the petitioner remains at large and fails to join the investigation.

JUDGMENT

SUMEET GOEL, J.

The petition in hand has been filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as BNSS) (erstwhile Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973), with the following substantive prayer:

“It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that the present petition may kindly be allowed and the FIR No.01 dated 10.01.2026 under Section 318(4), 336(2), 336(3), 338, 340, 61(2) of BNS 2023 (under Section 420, 463, 465, 467, 471, and 120-B of IPC), Annexure P-7, registered at Police Station NRI District Mohali Punjab being the misuse of process of law got recorded by an incompetent person having no dispute with the petitioner in any manner nor is single penny has been taken from the complainant respondent No. 4 rather the father of the complainant alleged NRI executed agreement to sell for the sale of land measuring 54 Bigha and received Rs.28 lakhs after the execution of the agreement to sell, Annexure P-1, and became dishonest in order to usurp the money advanced and did not come present for the execution of the sale deed the petitioner left with no other alternative but to filed a Civil Suit which was entertain and injunction was granted on 24.10.2025 (Annexure P-3) and the vendor- respondent No.5 illegally and unlawfully tried his best to convert the civil dispute in criminal offence and moved an application before the crime branch which was filed and having failed in achieving the same respondent No. 4 by concealing the factum of filing the said complaint dated (Annexure P-5) filed by the respondent No. 4 by misguiding the privilege given to NRIs and the NRI Authorities got the said FIR registered without any occurrence or loss caused to the said complainant/respondent No. 4 and it is the clear cut misuse of process of law where this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to exercise its jurisdiction for quashing the FIR in question on the grounds inter alia”

2. The relevant factual backdrop of the lis in hand is adumbrated thus:

(i) FIR No.01 dated 10.01.2026, under Sections 318(4), 336(2), 336(3), 338, 340, 61(2) of the BNS, 2023, at Police Station NRI District Mohali (hereinafter referred to as impugned FIR), Punjab came to be registered against the petitioner. As per the impugned FIR, complainant, namely Jaskirat Singh Tiwana, is an NRI and son of Harwinder Singh, who is stated to be the owner of the property in question, it has been alleged by the complainant that the accused persons, namely, Kuldeep Singh (petitioner herein) and Manpreet Singh, along with certain other unscrupulous individuals have committed fraud by making forged agreement to sell with an intention to take unlawful possession of the property in question. It has been alleged that the said agreement to sell is forged and fabricated and has been created as part of a conspiracy to grab the property of his father illegally. It has been further alleged that the accused persons, in connivance with each other, dishonestly induced his father to execute the said agreement and thereafter initiated civil proceedings for specific performance. The complainant has further alleged that Kuldeep Singh (petitioner herein)played an active and significant role in the entire transaction. It has been specifically alleged that the petitioner introduced the father of the complainant to the co-accused. It has been further alleged that the petitioner, in conspiracy with the co-accused, prepared a forged and fa