##PAGE1##

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Decided on: 01.08.2025 Kanwarjit Kaur ...Petitioner Versus Gian Chand Garg …Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA Present: Mr. Jashandeep Singh, Advocate and Ms. Anjali, Advocate for the petitioner.

****

ANOOP CHITKARA, J.

CRM-29591 of 2025 Vide this application, the applicant-petitioner seeks the connection of the present petition with CWP-9771-2024, which is pending before another bench of this Court.

The grounds taken for connection are that the outcome of this petition would have a bearing on the rights of the parties and vice versa. I have heard counsel on this aspect and in my considered opinion, proceedings under Section 340 CrPC are independent and as such, even if the petition’s decision goes against the petitioner or respondent, it cannot have any bearing on the outcome of that petition.

Given above, the application is dismissed.

Main case

1. Seeking initiation of an inquiry under section 379 of BNSS 2023 for proceeding against the private respondents for committing perjury, for fabricating documents and creating false evidence in CWP-9771-2024, the petitioner has come up before this court. 2. I have heard counsel for the petitioner to determine whether the matter is worth issuing notices or not and its analysis would lead to the following outcome.

3. The petitioner claims that respondent Gian Chand Garg had filed a Civil Suit No. 2156 of 2023 against the present petitioner and others, seeking declaration and permanent injunction concerning House number 2075, Sector 15 C, Chandigarh, which is now pending before the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chandigarh. In this said Civil Suit, the trial court vide order dated 18th November 2023, had passed an ex-parte interim order, directing the parties to maintain status quo regarding ownership of the property till the next date of hearing. The petitioner had no knowledge of the said order till 8th of December

2023, when she had executed the sale deed.

4. After that, respondent filed a writ bearing number CWP-9771-2024 in this Court, where he made a false statement on oath, in paragraph 4 of the Writ petition, which reads as follows:-

“4. That the Ld. SJSD Chandigarh vide order dated 18.11.2023 issued the direction to maintain status quo qua the ownership of the suit property i.e. H.No.2075, Sector 15 Chnadigarh, till next date i.e. 11.12.2023. In this suit, Smt. Kanwarjit Kaur w/o Harinder Pal Singh was respondent No.3(i) and she was conveyed through Whatsapp on 22.11.2023 and in reply to the sender of this message she congratulated him on whatsapp on Gurupurav day. Photocopy of the order dated 18.11.2023 and photocopy of the whatsapp message dated 22.11.2023 are annexed herewith as Annexures P-

1 & P-2.”

5. The petitioner’s grievance is that while filing CWP-9771-2024 in this Court, the respondent Gian Chand Garg intentionally and deliberately made a false statement on oath. The petitioner’s further grievance is that respondent had made an identical statement in multiple judicial proceedings including Civil Suit No. 2156 of 2023, Contempt petition i.e. Civil Miscellaneous No. 141 of 2024 under Order 39 Rule 2A CPC, and in Civil Suit No.687 of 2024. In all these matters, he had consistently claimed that the status quo order was served upon him through WhatsApp message on 22nd November 2023 i.e. after four days of the order, which was passed on 18th November 2023. The petitioner further claim that after the execution of the sale deed, the respondent Gian Chand Garg filed a complaint against the petitioner before the Tehsildar for taking action that the sale deed was executed by concealing the orders of status quo, which was marked by Tehsildar to the Superintendent of Police, Chandigarh, for investigation regarding the existence of some WhatsApp messages on which the stay order was conveyed.

6. The petitioner further submits that Gian Chand Garg made a false complaint before the police authoritie