IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

Manpreet Singh ....Petitioner.

VERSUS State of Punjab ....Respondent.

WITH (2) CRR-2977-2025 (O&M)

Rinku Kumar and others ....Petitioners.

VERSUS State of Punjab ....Respondent.

***

1. Date when the judgment was reserved 22.04.2026 2. Date when the judgment is pronounced 28.04.2026 3. Date when the judgment is uploaded 28.04.2026 on the website

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

5. The delay, if any, of the pronouncement Not applicable.

of full judgment, and reasons thereof.

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH ---

Argued by:Mr. Yoginder Nagpal, Advocate for the petitioner (in CRR-2836-2025).

Mr. Akun Sheemar, Advocate for the petitioners (in CRR-2977-2025).

Mr. Manjinder Singh Bhullar, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab.

None for the complainant.

****

SANJAY VASHISTH, J. (Oral)

By this common order, both the afore-mentioned petitions are disposed of together as the same are preferred against, one and same order.

2. Petitioner-Manpreet Singh (in CRR-2836-2025) and petitioners namely Rinku Kumar, Joni Kumar and Vikas Kumar (in CRR-2977-2025), have been summoned vide order dated 03.10.2025 passed by the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Mansa, by exercising its power under Section 358 of BNSS, 2023 (Section 319 Cr.P.C.).

Rinku son of the complainant-Om Parkash died on 14.12.2022, while he was in his house. During investigation, Rinku, Joni and Vicky sons of Bhura Ram and Manpreet Singh son of Lalu Ram were declared innocent, while submitting final report under Section 173 Cr.P.C., which was presented against one accused namely Pinki Rani (wife of deceased Rinku).

3. Counsel for the petitioners argued that first application regarding investigation into the death of Rinku was moved by complainant-Om Parkash on 02.03.2023, without naming any suspect therein. Another application was submitted on 27.07.2023 to Senior Superintendent of Police, Mansa, mentioning therein that Pinki Rani (his daughter-in-law) and some other people along with her, Manpreet Singh knows the whole story, which has become the reason for death of his son and that it happened due to the connivance of said people.

When no FIR was being registered, on filing of a direction petition (CRM-M-46132-2023) for conducting fair and impartial inquiry with regard to the death of Rinku and also for deciding of representation dated 27.07.2023, during the pendency of the petition, FIR No.210 dated

09.11.2023 under Section 302 IPC was registered against Pinki Rani at Police Station Boha, District Mansa. Vide order dated 14.02.2024, direction petition was disposed of, as no further cause of action survived.

4. Counsel argued that except of one accused Pinki Rani, no other name was mentioned in the F.I.R. Counsel further submitted that it was only during the appearance of complainant-Om Parkash as PW-1, when he deposed first time regarding the names of all four petitioners herein. In his evidence, the witness deposed that:-

“My neighbours stated that they had noticed my son upto

7 PM on that day and he was walking. My neighbours also told me that on that day at about 6 PM, two persons with muffled faces, had come to our house on Platina Motorcycle without number and at that time, my son Rinku and his wife Pinki Rani were quarrelling with each other and that Manpreet Singh son of Lalu Ram, resident of Boha was also present there. Thereafter, I along with my relative reached at Civil Hospital, Budhlada, where I found that Pinki, Bhura Ram, Rinku (brother of Pinki Rani), Jony and Vicky were present in the hospital and they were talking with each other.”

Counsel referred whole of the examination-in-chief of PW-1 and submitted that except of raising doubt due to the presence of the now summoned accused in the hospital along with main accused Pinki Rani and doubting chastity of his own daughter-in-law, there was neither any material collected during investigation nor such evidence c