IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Reserved on: 30.01.2026 Date of decision: 10.02.2026 IXXXXX ...Petitioner Versus STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS ...Respondents

1 The date when the judgment is reserved 30.1.2026

2 The date when the judgment is pronounced 10.02.2026 3 The date when the judgment is uploaded on the website 11.02.2026

4 Whether only operative part of the judgment is Full pronounced or whether the full judgment is pronounced

5 The delay, if any, of the pronouncement of full N.A.

judgment, and reasons thereof.

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE KIRTI SINGH Argued by: Mr. Mansur Ali, Senior Advocate with Mr. Vaibhav Garg, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Aakanksha Gupta, AAG, Punjab.

Mr. Deepak Aggarwal, Advocate for respondent No.5.

****

KIRTI SINGH, J.

1. Prayer in the present petition filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, is for transfer of investigation of FIR No.184 dated 17.10.2024 under Sections 376, 506 and 120-B of IPC, registered at Police Station, Sadar Nabha, District Patiala to an independent agency, under the supervision of respondent No.2-Director General of Police, Punjab.

2. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was adopted by Sh. Pardeep Sood on 27.11.1993 from the Missionaries of Charity (Mother Teresa), Sector 23-A, Chandigarh. It is further submitted that Sh.Pardeep Sood is the biological father of respondent No.5. After the adoption, both respondent No.5 and his father-Sh. Pardeep Sood, started ill-treating the petitioner. Respondent No.5 even subjected the petitioner to sexual assault, however, due to complete dependence on the adoptive father, the petitioner could not report the matter to the authorities prior to the registration of the instant FIR, whereinunder after securing anticipatory bail, respondent No.5 began openly threatening the petitioner, prompting her to file a complaint with the authorities.

3. Learned Senior counsel has submitted that the petitioner is seeking the transfer of investigation in the instant case for the reason that the agency concerned is not conducting the investigation in a fair and impartial manner. It is further submitted that despite constituting two SITs, the investigation of the instant case has not been taken to any logical end and both times cancellation of FIR has been recommended, whereas prima facie offence under Sections 376, 506 and 120-B of IPC are made out. Respondent No.5 is an influential industrialist who even started harassing and threatening the petitioner after being granted the concession of anticipatory bail, which compelled the petitioner to move a complaint (Annexure P-4) in this regard before the authorities.

4. Per contra, learned State counsel while placing reliance upon the short affidavit dated 18.08.2025 submits that the instant FIR was got lodged on the complaint moved by the petitioner after a report received from the Superintendent of Police. Subsequently, an SIT was constituted comprising of SP (HQ), Patiala; DSP (HQ), Patiala and SHO, PS Nabha vide order No.73747-55-C-3 dated 24.10.2024 for proper investigation of the case. The SIT vide its report dated 26.12.2024 recommended cancellation of the present FIR. Thereafter, the petitioner being aggrieved from the said cancellation moved another application requesting therein further investigation. A second SIT was constituted to look into the matter thoroughly, which, after analyzing the entire records, documents and statements of the parties, again recommended cancellation of the present FIR. A perusal of both the SIT report reveal that there is no truth in the present FIR and the alleged dispute pertains to be of civil nature. In this regard, the petitioner has also filed a civil suit bearing No.600 of 2021 in the Court of learned Civil Judge, Nabha for declaration. Thus, it is prayed that the present petition be dismissed.

5. Learned counsel for respondent No.5 submits that respondent No.5 is the brother of the petitio