IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Reserved on : 07.02.2025 Pronounced on : 21.02.2025 Gurdeep Singh and others ...Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and another ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Present:- Mr. Anureet Singh Sidhu, Advocate for the petitioners.

Ms. Ruchika Sabherwal, Sr. DAG, Punjab.

MANISHA BATRA, J.

1. This petition has been filed by the petitioners under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for quashing of FIR No. 0056 dated 04.07.2024, registered under Sections 303(2) and 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNS’) and Section 13(A) of the Punjab Village Common Land Regulation Act, 1961 (for short ‘PVCL Act’) at Police Station Julkan, District Patiala along with all the subsequent proceedings having emanated therefrom.

2. Brief facts of the case relevant for the purpose of disposal of this petition are that the aforementioned FIR was registered on a complaint lodged by Block Development and Panchayat Officer, Bhunaheri (for short ‘BDPO’) alleging therein that he was informed by the Administrator and Panchayat Secretary of Gram Panchayat, Devi Nagar Hira Singh Wala that he had received a telephonic information that around 12 trees of Eucalyptus had been cut from the shamlat land. It was alleged that the said trees were cut and sold by the present petitioner along with some other persons as per resolution passed by them. A copy of the said resolution was sent by the complainant to police and it was prayed that the legal action be taken. After registration of the FIR, investigation proceedings were initiated. The petitioners had been extended benefit of bail. After completion of necessary investigation and usual formalities, challan was presented in the Court and presently, the petitioners are facing trial for commission of aforesaid mentioned offences.

3. The present petition has been filed by the petitioners seeking quashing of FIR and challan report and the subsequent proceedings having emanated therefrom on the ground that they have been falsely implicated in this case. They are facing gamut of trial. It has been argued that in fact the petitioners are former Sarpanch, Panch and Lambardar etc. of the Gram Panchayat concerned and a resolution was passed by the villagers on 12.06.2024 (Annexure P-2) for cutting the trees of eucalyptus from the cremation ground. In this regard, an application dated 1306.2024 (Annexure P-3) was sent to respondent No. 2 and cutting of the trees was done with due permission of respondent No. 2/ BDPO. Even otherwise, after cutting the said trees, about 100 trees were again planted in the cremation ground and Hadda Rori of the village. The cut down trees were sold with the permission of respondent No. 2. A separate resolution was passed by the villagers on 04.07.2024 by mentioning the amount of money which was received thereof. The amount of money so received was spent by the villagers for cleaning of rainy water/flood water drainages and also for other welfare works. Since at the relevant time, the Panchayat was not functioning, the villagers by passing the aforesaid resolutions have got the said trees cut for the above said purpose but the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case by respondent No. 2. The petitioners have not used the sale proceeds for their personal purposes. It is argued that the allegations on the face of record do not make out any case for commission of offences for which the petitioners have been booked and challaned and, therefore, it is argued that his petition deserves to be allowed and the proceedings as initiated against them as well as the FIR deserve to be quashed.

4. Reply has been filed by the respondent-State. It is submitted therein and learned Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab has argued that the petitioners along with some other co-accused had cut 12 trees of eucalyputs standing on the Shamlat land and had sold the same withou