##PAGE1##

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH

Reserved on: 28.04.2026

Pronounced on: 04.05.2026

Uploaded on: 05.05.2026

Whether only operative part of the judgment is

Pronounced or the full judgment is pronounced: operative part/full judgment

1. CRM-M No.25477 of 2021 (O&M)

Naib Singh

…Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab and another

…Respondents

2. CRM-M No.33546 of 2022

Swarn Singh Sandhu

…Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab and another

…Respondents

CORAM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE MANDEEP PANNU

Argued by:- Mr. P.P.S. Duggal, Advocate

for the petitioner (in CRM-M No.25477 of 2021).

Mr. J.S. Brar, Advocate

for the petitioner (in CRM-M No.33546 of 2022).

Mr. Sahil Chowdhary, AAG, Punjab.

for respondent No.1-State (in both the petitions).

Mr. Achin Gupta, Advocate and

Mr. Karan Bansal, Advocate

for respondent No.2 (in both the petitions).

*****

NEETU RANI

2026.05.05 09:35

I attest to the accuracy and

authenticity of this order/judgment

PHHC, CHD

CRM-M No.25477 of 2021 (O&M)

and another connected case -2-

MANDEEP PANNU, J

1. Two separate petitions have been filed under Section 482 of

the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing of FIR No.0069 dated

27.04.2021, registered under Sections 379, 447, 506 and 34 of the Indian

Penal Code, 1860 at Police Station Sadar Faridkot, District Faridkot.

2. Learned counsel for petitioner Naib Singh has contended that

the present FIR is nothing but an abuse of the process of law and has been

got registered at the instance of respondent No.2 due to ulterior motives

and extraneous considerations. It is submitted that the dispute between the

parties is purely of a civil nature arising out of an agreement to sell dated

06.01.2001 with respect to land measuring 26 kanals situated at Village

Quilla Nau, Tehsil and District Faridkot, for which a civil suit for

possession by way of specific performance had already been filed and

decided in favour of respondent No.2, against which Regular Second

Appeal is pending before this Court, wherein operation of the impugned

judgment has been stayed and the said stay order is still in force. It is

further contended that despite the subsisting stay order, which was well

within the knowledge of the police officials as well as respondent No.2, a

false and fabricated version has been set up and the present FIR has been

registered. It is argued that the petitioner is in possession of the land in

question and had sown the wheat crop, and apprehending interference, had

already moved representations to the SHO and SSP seeking protection, but

no action was taken. Learned counsel further submits that on 27.04.2021,

the petitioner was illegally detained by the police at the instance of

NEETU RANI

2026.05.05 09:35

I attest to the accuracy and

authenticity of this order/judgment

PHHC, CHD

CRM-M No.25477 of 2021 (O&M)

and another connected case -3-

respondent No.2, who is an influential person, and during such illegal

detention, the crop was got harvested by respondent No.2 with the aid of

police officials. It is contended that in order to justify the illegal acts and

detention, the present FIR has been falsely registered against the petitioner

and others. It is also argued that the registration of the FIR, despite the

subsisting stay order passed by this Court, is in clear violation of the rule of

law and amounts to gross misuse of the process of law. The police officials,

being aware of the stay order, have acted in connivance with respondent

No.2 and are liable for appropriate action. On these grounds, it is prayed

that the FIR in question be quashed.

3. Learned counsel for petitioner Swarn Singh Sandhu has

argued on the same lines as raised by learned counsel for petitioner Naib

Singh and has adopted the said arguments. It is further submitted that the

allegations in the FIR are false and have been levelled with an oblique

motive, and the dispute between the parties is essentially civil in nature,

arising out of the agreement to sell and pending litigation between the

parties. Hence, it is prayed that the FIR in question be quashe