IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision :08.12.2025 Ajay Kumar and others ......Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and another ...... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA PARTAP SINGH Present : Mr. Ritesh Pandey, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr. Eklavya Darshi, DAG, Punjab.

SURYA PARTAP SINGH , J . (Oral) :

1. For the commission of offence punishable under Sections 118(2), 115(2), 191(3), 190, 126(2) and 324(4), the FIR No.7 dated 06.02.2025, has been lodged in Police Station Sekhwan District Batala. The petitioners have been implicated as accused and they are being prosecuted for the commission of above mentioned offence. Petitioners are aggrieved of their prosecution vide above mentioned FIR, and therefore, they have filed this petition for quashing of FIR.

2. In nut-shelll the facts projected by the petitioners vide this petition are that marriage of ‘Saranjeet Kaur’ was solemnized with ‘Sandeep Singh’ on 27.08.2023 and that soon after the marriage differences cropped up between ‘Saranjeet Kaur’ and ‘Sandeep’ because of cruelty to which ‘Saranjeet Kaur’ was subjected to by her in-laws, the FIR No.121 dated 24.12.2024 was lodged in Police Sation Sadar Gurdasspur, for the commission of offence under Sections 498-A and 406 IPC.

3. It has been further alleged by the petitioners that prior to above mentioned FIR number of counselling sessions had taken place between the family members of both sides and that one of said sessions had taken place on 26.09.2024 in Women Cell, Gurdaspur. According to petitioners, after the above mentioned sessions when cousin brother of ‘Sharanjeet Kaur’ namely ‘Sahib Singh’ and other family members were talking to each other ‘Sandeep Singh’ his father ‘Amarjit Singh’, ‘Amrik Singh’ and ‘Gurpreet Singh’ assaulted ‘Sahib Singh’ and others, and inflicted injuries on their person. According to petitioners although with regard to above mentioned incident the statement of injured ‘Sahib Singh’ was recorded on 28.09.2024, itself, but no FIR was lodged by the police till 14.02.2025, when the FIR No.25 was lodged. 4. It is the allegation of the petitioners that opposite party has strong political links and that in collusion with police officials a false case has been lodged by the complainant against the petitioners with regard to the incident dated 26.09.2024. It has been claimed by the petitioners that with regard to an incident which had allegedly taken place at 4.00 P.M on 26.09.2024, a false story has been cooked up by the complainant with regard to assault by the petitioners upon the complainant. As per petitioners, the above mentioned FIR being an outcome of false narration of facts, deserves to be quashed.

5. Notice of motion.

6. Since advance notice has already been served, Mr. Eklavya Darshi, DAG, Punjab, appears on behalf of respondent-State, and waives service. He has not opted to file reply in writing. However he has orally opposed the present petition.

7. Heard.

8. It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that the FIR lodged against the petitioners is nothing but a sheer misuse of authority by the police officials, and that petitioners who are victim of violence by the complainant and his other family members have been wrongly prosecuted by virtue of FIR in question. According to learned counsel for the petitioners, the falsity of the allegations against the petitioners can be gazed from the fact that on 26.09.2024 at about 4.00 P.M. when the alleged incident, with the complainant, had taken place at Gurdaspur, all the petitioners were present at a distance of 30 kilometers from the place of occurrence, i.e at Batala. While referring to the tower locations of the mobile phones of the petitioners it has been claimed by learned counsel for the petitioners that an altogether false story has been set-out by the prosecution.

9. According to learned counsel for the petitioners as a counter blast and in order to pressurize the petitioners, not to pursue