IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-20877-2026 (O&M) Date of decision : 27.04.2026 Shamsher and others ...Petitioners Versus State of Haryana and another ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Present:- Mr. Shailender Singh Gill, Advocate for the petitioners.

Ms. Himani Arora, DAG, Haryana.

MANISHA BATRA, J. (Oral)

1. Prayer in this petition, filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’), is for quashing of FIR No. 494 dated 08.12.2023, registered under Section 506 of IPC (Section 195-A of IPC added later on) at Police Station Civil Lines Kaithal, District Kaithal along with all the subsequent proceedings having emanated threrefrom.

2. Brief facts of the case relevant for the purpose of disposal of this petition are the aforementioned FIR was registered on the basis of a written complaint filed by complainant/respondent No.2-Dalbir Singh Punia alleging that the petitioners along with one unidentified person had earlier kidnapped his cousin Rajbeer at gunpoint after intoxicating him. They allegedly obtained his thumb impressions and signatures on forged documents, including an agreement concerning 18 Kanal 19 Marla land ₹

situated in Patti Koth as well as receipts showing payment of 7.40 crores and other blank/typed papers, without any actual payment. It was further alleged that victim Rajbeer had submitted a written complaint to the Superintendent of Police concerned regarding the said acts and subsequently died due to the actions of the accused. In this regard, FIR No. 128 dated 04.04.2016 under Sections 420, 342, 120-B, 467, 471 and 306 IPC was already registered at Police Station City and the trial in that case is presently at the stage of evidence, wherein the complainant is a witness. The complainant also alleged that petitioner Shamsher Singh and his wife have a history of falsely implicating individuals in rape cases for monetary gain. On 08.12.2023, during the lunch break while his cross-examination was ongoing, the complainant went to a tea stall near Chamber No. 30, where petitioner Krishan and an associate threatened to kill him. Later, near the court of Shri Krishan Kant, all the accused again threatened him with death if he deposed against them. On the basis of these allegations, the present FIR was registered and investigation proceedings were initiated. After completion of necessary investigation and usual formalities, challan was presented in the Court and presently, the petitioners are facing trial for commission of aforementioned offences.

3. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioners that they have been falsely implicated in this case. The proceedings in the aforementioned FIR No. 128 have been going on smoothly since the year 2016 and the petitioners have never tried to threaten any witness. Even charge under Section 306 of IPC in the said case has been quashed by this Court. The complainant has got registered the present FIR only with a view to exert pressure upon the petitioners as the criminal as well as civil litigations are going on between them. A perusal of the FIR would show that not even a prima facie case for the alleged offences is made out. Initially, the allegations in the FIR were found to be false but the complainant has subsequently manipulated the same. The witnesses, whose statements were recorded under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. by the investigating officer, have not been mentioned as witnesses in the challan report. Rather, all the cited witnesses are interested ones and family members of the complainant. Charges against the petitioners have erroneously been framed by the learned trial Court while ignoring the aforementioned facts. There are no chances of the petitioners being convicted, even if the allegations in the FIR are considered to be correct. The proceedings have been initiated before the learned trial Court only with a view to abuse the process of law. With these broad submissions