TARSEM BANSAL & Anr. v. STATE OF PUNJAB & Anr.
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 ss. 420, 467, 468, 471
Judgment
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK MANCHANDA HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK Mr. B.D. Sharma, Advocate for the appellants. Present: Mr. B.D. Sharma, Advocate for the appellants. Mr. B.D. Sharma, Advocate for the appellants. Mr. Kuljeet Singh, Additional Advocate General, Punjab. Mr. Kuljeet Singh, Additional Advocate General, Punjab. Mr. Kuljeet Singh, Additional Advocate General, Punjab. G.S. Punia, Senior Advocate with Mr. G.S. Punia, Senior Advocate with Mr. Ms. Deepa Negi Ms. Deepa Negi, Advocate and Ms. Harveen Kaur, Advocate for respondent No.2. Ms. Harveen Kaur, Advocate respondent No.2. ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL, J. (ORAL) ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL, J. (ORAL) This criminal appeal has arisen out of the judgment of the appellate This criminal appeal has arisen out of the judgment of the appellate This criminal appeal has arisen out of the judgment of the appellate This criminal appeal has arisen out of the judgment of the appellate Court dated 04.01.2019 whereby the accused were acquitted of offences under dated 04.01.2019 whereby the accused were acquitted of offences under whereby the accused were acquitted of offences under Section 420, 467, 468 and 471 IPC. Section 420, 467, 468 and 471 IPC. Learned senior counsel for respondent No.2 Learned senior counsel for submits that the respondent No.2 submits that the criminal case was an offshoot of a family dispute over settlement of the assets. criminal case was an offshoot of a family dispute over settlement of the assets. criminal case was an offshoot of a family dispute over settlement of the assets. This Court, on 11.12.2023, had directed the parties to appear before This Court, on 11.12.2023, had directed the parties to appear before This Court, on 11.12.2023, had directed the parties to appear before This Court, on 11.12.2023, had directed the parties to appear before Mediator the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court. The report of the Mediator the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court. The report of the the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court. The report of the has been received which indicates that the parties have arrived dated 11.01.2024 has been received which indicates that the parties have arrived has been received which indicates that the parties have arrived dated 11.01.2024 at a settlement. The settlement agreement dated 11.01.2024 is taken on record. at a settlement. The settlement agreement dated 11.01.2024 is taken on record. at a settlement. The settlement agreement dated 11.01.2024 is taken on record. at a settlement. The settlement agreement dated 11.01.2024 is taken on record. said agreement was amended as time granted to respondent No.2 to Further, the said agreement was amended as time granted to respondent No.2 to said agreement was amended as time granted to respondent No.2 to said agreement was amended as time granted to respondent No.2 to vacate the premises was extended uptil 30.09.2025 and in this regard statement vacate the premises was extended uptil 30.09.2025 and in this regard statement vacate the premises was extended uptil 30.09.2025 and in this regard statement vacate the premises was extended uptil 30.09.2025 and in this regard statement of respondent No.2 was recorded in the order passed in of respondent No.2 was recorded in RSA No.1559 of 2014 the order passed in RSA No.1559 of 2014 which was decided on 27.03.2025. which was decided on 27.03.2025 SWARNJIT SINGH 2025.08.13 16:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRA-AD-516-2019 -2- In view of the settlement arrived at between the parties, the appeal stands disposed of. Both the parties shall remain abide by the settlement dated
11.01.2024 and the statement recorded on 27.03.2025, as referred above. (ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL) JUDGE (DEEPAK MANCHANDA) JUDGE
12.08.2025 SwarnjitS Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable : : Yes / No Yes / No SWARNJIT SINGH 2025.08.13 16:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — ss. 420, 467, 468, 471.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Punjab & Haryana High Court, on 12 Aug 2025. The bench was ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL, DEEPAK MANCHANDA, DEEPAK.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No treatment data yet for this judgment in the Courts & Cases corpus.
Absence of data is not a statement about the judgment’s standing — the corpus covers only judgments we index and link with cited evidence.