CRM-M No. 39584 of 2026 · Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh High Court · 2026
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
the petition is hereby disposed of with liberty
Provisions considered
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 s. 528
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 ss. 115(2), 117(4), 118(2), 126(2), 173(4), 190, 191(3), 351(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 s. 156(3)
Judgment
CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL Present: Mr. Ashok Bhardwaj, Advocate for the petitioner dvocate for the petitioners. Mr. Sukhbeer Singh, DAG, Punjab. Mr. Sukhbeer Singh, DAG, Punjab *** Shalini Singh Nagpal, J.(Oral) Shalini Singh Nagpal,
#1. The petition under Section 528 of BNSS a Section 528 of BNSS has been filed for a direction to off investigation of FIR No.83 dated official respondents to transfer investigation of FIR No.83 dated investigation of FIR No.83 dated , 02.04.2026, under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 351(2), 191(3), 190 of BNS 02.04.2026, under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 351(2), 191(3), 190 of BNS, 02.04.2026, under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 351(2), 191(3), 190 of BNS Police Station Lehra, District Sangrur, respondent No.4 Police Station Lehra, District /Investigation Officer respondent No.4/Investigation Officer failed to invoke Sections 118(2) and 117(4) of BNS. having failed to invoke Sections 118(2) and 117(4) of BNS failed to invoke Sections 118(2) and 117(4) of BNS
#2. aforesaid FIR Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that aforesaid FIR Learned counsel for the petitioner private ged on complaint of petitioners, regarding assault by private ged on complaint of petitioners, was lodged on complaint of petitioners, evous injuries were caused to the petitioners but the police respondents. Grievous injuries were caused to the petitioners but the police evous injuries were caused to the petitioners but the police respondents. Gri invoked only Section 115(2) of BNS. Representation invoked only Section 115(2) 7 was . Representation, Annexure P-7 was moved to Senior Su Senior Superintendent of Police, Sangrur in terms of Section perintendent of Police, Sangrur in terms of Section 173(4) BNS but no action was taken thereon. 173(4) BNS but no action was taken thereon. 173(4) BNS but no action was taken thereon.
#4. Notice of motion to official respon motion to official respondents. who is present in Court, Mr. Sukhbeer Singh, DAG, Punjab, who is present in Court, Mr. Sukhbeer Singh, DAG, Punjab on instructions from accepts notice on behalf of the official respondents. He, on instructions from accepts notice on behalf of the official respondents accepts notice on behalf of the official respondents ASI Satgur Singh there was no opinion of the doctor declaring Singh, submits that there was no opinion of the doctor declaring there was no opinion of the doctor declaring 2 CRM-M-39584 39584-2026 (O&M) the injury grievous, therefore only Section 115(2) BNS was invoked. He the injury grievous, therefore only Section 115(2) BNS was invoked. He the injury grievous, therefore only Section 115(2) BNS was invoked. He the injury grievous, therefore only Section 115(2) BNS was invoked. He prayed for dismissal of present petition. prayed for dismissal of present petition.
#5. Sakiri Vasu vs. State of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Sakiri Vasu vs. State of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: the petition is hereby disposed of with liberty
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 528; Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — ss. 115(2), 117(4), 118(2), 126(2), 173(4), 190, 191(3), 351(2); Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 156(3).
Which court decided this case, and when?
Punjab & Haryana High Court, on 20 Jul 2026. The bench was SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL.
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.