IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-29098-2025 DECIDED ON:26.05.2025 KEWAL KRISHAN ...PETITIONER VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS ....RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MOUDGIL Present: Mr. H.S. Sehgal, Advocate for the petitioner.

****

SANDEEP MOUDGIL, J

1. PRAYER The jurisdiction of this Court has been invoked under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 seeking quashing the impugned FIR No. 02, dated 07.01.2022 (Annexure P-1) Under Sections 420 & 120-B IPC registered at Police Station Kotbhai, District Sri Muktsar Sahib and all consequential proceeding arising therefrom including police report/challan dated 25.04.2023 (Annexure P-2).

2. FACTS The brief facts of the present case are that Guranditta Singh and Jagjit Singh, sons of Joginder Singh, lodged an FIR against nine individuals alleging that they purchased 20 Kanals of agricultural land from Basant Kaur (wife of Pritam Singh) through a registered sale deed dated 07.01.1993, and another 16 Kanals through a sale deed dated 18.05.1995. The corresponding mutations were duly sanctioned in their names. However, it is alleged that Pritam Singh and Basant Kaur, in connivance with others, fraudulently executed a mortgage deed dated 29.01.1998 for 24 Kanals 5 Marlas of land including land already sold to the complainants in favour of Punjab Agricultural and Development Bank, Gidderbaha, and secured a loan of ₹

2,10,000 on 17.03.1998. The loan was never repaid, and the Bank has now initiated proceedings to sell the mortgaged land, which includes the complainants' property. The complainants allege cheating and forgery by the accused. Hence the present FIR.

3. SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and has no nexus whatsoever with the alleged offence. It is submitted that the petitioner, who was serving as a Patwari in the Revenue Department at the relevant time, has been unnecessarily arrayed as an accused and made a scapegoat in a matter which, at its core, pertains to a civil dispute between the vendor and the vendees a dispute which now stands resolved.

It is argued that the petitioner has never prepared or issued the alleged jamabandi purported to be forged or fabricated. The investigation conducted by the police is stated to be perfunctory and incomplete, as the challan was presented on 25.04.2023 without awaiting the Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) report concerning the alleged forged jamabandi.

Learned counsel submits that a bare reading of the FIR reveals that the entire controversy is civil in nature and has been given a criminal colour. It is emphasized that even if Basant Kaur mortgaged excess land to the Bank and raised a loan thereon, the alleged loss can be compensated from the remaining estate left behind by her, now succeeded by her husband Pritam Singh.

Lastly, it is contended that the petitioner has not derived any benefit, directly or indirectly, from the alleged acts of Basant Kaur or her husband, and therefore his prosecution is wholly unwarranted.

ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT-STATE On the other hand, Mr. J.S. Rattu, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab appearing on advance notice has prayed for dismissal of the present petition stating that the petitioner has been rightly arrayed as an accused in the present case owing to his active role and involvement in the execution and facilitation of a fraudulent transaction, which has caused substantial loss and prejudice to the complainants. It is submitted that despite the land in question having already been sold to the complainants vide registered sale deeds dated 07.01.1993 and 18.05.1995, a forged and fabricated mortgage deed was subsequently executed on 29.01.1998 in favour of Punjab Agricultural and ₹

Development Bank, Gidderbaha, and a loan of 2,10,000 was obtained against the same. Crucially, this transaction could not have taken place without the active connivance or gross negli