IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Naresh Kumar ......Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and Ors.

.....Respondents Reserved on : 12.09.2025 Pronounced on: 2.12.2025 Judgment uploaded on: 04.12.2025 Whether only the operative part of the judgment is pronounced or whether the full judgment is pronounced: Full Judgment CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE AARADHNA SAWHNEY Present: Mr. I.S. Pabla, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Vikram Singh, AAG, Haryana.

Mr. S.S. Gill, Advocate for respondent No.2.

AARADHNA SAWHNEY , J (ORAL)

1. Challenge in the present revision petition is to order dated 10.06.2019 (Annexure P.5) passed by the then learned Sessions Judge Kurukshetra vide which revision petition filed by the complainant-respondent No.2 against order dated 25.04.2019 passed by learned JMIC, Kurukshetra, dismissing his application filed under Section 311 Cr.P.C to lead additional evidence, has been accepted while allowing the same.

2. Relevant facts as emerging from the documents on record be noticed hereinbelow:

Complainant Hari Singh filed a complaint against the petitioners and others, who are his grand-sons averring therein that he was owner in possession of land measuring 72 kanal 04 marla 2 sarsai, being 1/4^th share of the total land measuring 288 kanals 17 marla comprised in Khewat No.371, Kittas 44 situated within the revenue estate of village Kirmach, Tehsil Thanesar, District Kurukshetra.

Complainant maintained that he had three sons namely, Bhale Ram, Randhir Singh and Satnarain. He died leaving behind his widow Rajbala and minor daughter Harpreet Kaur. That apart, complainant is also blessed with four daughters, namely, Santosh, Bohti Devi, Angrejo Devi and Tejo Devi. Serious allegations were levelled by the complainant against his own grand-son. By taking undue advantage of his old age and frail medical condition, accused in collusion and conspiracy with each other, as also to cause wrongfull loss to him executed a forged relinquishment deed No.889/1 dated 08.05.2015, in favour of the respondent-accused Naresh Kumar in respect of the said land. Said relinquishment deed is illegal, inoperative, nonest and not binding on his rights as the same was result of fraud and cheating played by the accused in collusion with the witnesses and revenue officers. It is further the stand of the complainant that while he was admitted in Aggarwal Nursing Home, Kurukshetra from 04.05.2015 to 09.05.2015, respondent approached him and requested that since they had to obtain limit from the Bank, some formalities had to be completed by the Authorities. On this pretext, he (complainant) was taken to Tehsil office, Thanesar and his signatures were obtained on blank and printed papers. Thus by misleading him, certain documents were forged and a relinquishment deed was got prepared. On the strength of the said forged deed, mutation was consequently sanctioned in favour of accused No.1-namely, Deep Chand, who had previously also got executed a fabricated relinquishment Deed No.7093/1 dated 18.09.2014 issued in his name by impersonating the complainant. In the panchayat meeting that was convened to amicably resolve the dispute, Deep Chand admitted his guilt and got

MANOJ KUMtAhRe land transferred in favour of the complainant. As soon as the complainant

came to know of the other fabricated relinquishment deed dated 26.11.2015, he questioned the accused and threatened him with dire consequences. On the basis of said complaint, a formal case vide FIR No.77 dated 28.02.2016 under Sections

419,420,467,468,120-B,506 IPC was registered at P.S City Thanesar.

3. During the course of trial, an application was moved by the complainant Hari Singh under Section 311 Cr.P.C vide which permission of the Court was sought to examine two attesting witnesses namely, Bohti Devi and Angrejo Devi, his own daughters. He also wanted to tender certain registered documents regarding relinquishment deed. As noted hereinabove, the said application was dismissed by the learned