IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

311 CRM-M-14182-2024 (O&M) Date of decision : 07.07.2025 Daljeet Singh ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and another ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Present:- Mr. Harpreet S. Multani, Advocate and Mr. Harmanpreet Singh Mander, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Roshandeep Singh, AAG, Punjab.

Mr. Sahil Soi, Advocate for respondent No. 2.

MANISHA BATRA, J. (Oral)

1. The instant petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR No. 01 dated 04.03.2014 (Annexure P-3), registered under Sections 420 and 120-B of IPC (Section 495 of IPC added later on) at Police Station NRI Sangrur, Punjab along with all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom.

2. Brief facts of the case relevant for the purpose of disposal of this petition are that the aforementioned FIR was registered on the basis of a written complaint lodged by complainant/respondent No. 2-Swaranjit Kaur (now deceased) alleging therein that her daughter Sandeep Kaur was married to accused Gursharan Singh on 13.02.2005 according to Sikh rites and ceremonies. The above said Gursharan Singh was a permanent resident of United States of America (for short ‘USA’). Accused Manjit Singh Sekhon and Ranjit Kaur, who were maternal uncle and aunt respectively of Gursharan Singh, had met the complainant and had offered matrimonial alliance of Gursharan Singh for Sandeep Kaur, subject to spending an amount of Rs. 15 Lakhs in cash and giving 25 Tolas of gold. The complainant had fulfilled those demands. Their marriage was performed on 13.02.2005. After the birth of a male child to complainant’s daughter, she was taken by Gursharan Singh to USA and on reaching there, she found that Gursharan Singh was previously married and had a female child with that marriage. This fact was disclosed by the daughter of the complainant to her in January, 2011, when she visited India. She also disclosed to the complainant that Gursharan Singh had forcibly divorced her. By alleging that Gursharan Singh and co-accused Manjit Singh Sekhon and Ranjit Kaur had cheated her daughter and herself by concealing the factum of previous marriage of Gursharan Singh, the complainant prayed for initiating criminal proceedings against them.

3. After registration of the FIR, investigation proceedings were initiated. During investigation, the petitioner was nominated as accused in this case on the allegations that he, in connivance with co-accused Gursharan Singh, had concealed the factum of former marriage of Gursharan Singh. The petitioner could not be arrested. Proceedings under Section 82 of Cr.P.C. were initiated against him and he was declared a proclaimed person, vide order dated 30.09.2014, passed by the learned trial Court. He filed a petition, bearing number CRM-M-62236-2023 and his arrest was stayed. Subsequently, he was granted benefit of bail. Challan qua him has now been presented.

4. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that he has been falsely implicated in this case. The marriage between Sandeep Kaur and Gursharan Singh was performed on 13.02.2005. Sandeep Kaur resided with Gursharan Singh till December, 2011. Their marriage was dissolved by way of a decree of divorce. The impugned FIR was lodged in the year 2014 by the mother of Sandeep Kaur and not by Sandeep Kaur herself, who was the actual alleged victim. The petitioner was not named in the FIR. No allegation had been levelled against him in the FIR. His parents were involved in this case. The impugned FIR already stands quashed by this Court qua the parents of the petitioner, vide order dated 27.02.2019 passed in CRM-M-24149-2014. The petitioner had left India in the year 2010 and was in USA since then. He had never received any notice in connection with the impugned FIR nor any intimation regarding issuance of warrants had been given to him. No role has been attributed to him. He has been nominated as an accused