Varun Vs State of Punjab and Others

Present petition has been filed by the petitioner, seeking issuance of direction to respondent Nos.2 and 3 to decide the representations, submitted by the petitioner and his father, dated 25.09.2024 and 07.01.2025 (Annexures P-3 and P-5), and to take appropriate legal action, as per law, against respondent Nos.5 to 8 who have cheated/duped the petitioner for the tune of Rs.38 lacs.

¶14

Prime allegation of the petitioner is that respondent Nos.5 to 8 have cheated/duped the petitioner for an amount of Rs.38 lacs, by getting the same invested under the pretext of making it double.

¶15

After understanding the factual background and while issuing notice to the respondents, on 25.03.2025, this Court has passed following

¶16

order:-

¶17

LAVISHA 2025.11.10 18:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC, Chandigarh

¶18

CRM-M-16253-2025 (O&M)

¶19

-2-

¶20

“1. Prayer in the present petition under Section 528 BNSS, 2023 is for issuance of directions to respondent Nos.2 and 3 to decide the representations dated 25.09.2024 and 07.01.2025 (Annexure P-3 & P-5) submitted by the petitioner and his father.

¶21

It appears that hard earned money of the mother of the petitioner, which in fact was her retiral amount, has been used by the petitioner by investing the same in gambling. Now, after making his mother to suffer the actual loss, by moving representations (Annexures P-3 and P-5), he wants the money to be recovered back.

¶22

Notice of motion. 4. Mr. Amandeep Singh, DAG, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 4 – State and seeks time to file status report. 5. Let the subject matter highlighted before this Court be inquired/investigated by the official respondents and then to file status report.

¶23

Adjourned to 29.04.2025.

¶24

To be shown in the urgent list.”

¶25

Thereupon, status report dated 20.08.2025 was filed by learned

¶26

State counsel, wherein paragraph Nos.7, 8 and 9 reads as under:-

¶27

“ 7. That it is respectfully submitted that the Inquiry Officer examined ASI Som Raj, i.e. the Investigating Officer of FIR No.08 of 2025, registered under Section 21(c), 27 and 27 of NDPS Act, 1985, against him at Police Station Anti-Narcotics Task Force, Sector-79, Mohali, and recorded his statement and took record of investigation carried out by him in the said case, and from his statement and perusal of record of investigation, it has been transpired that respondent No.8-Vishal Sharma had disclosed during investigation that he used to bring Heroin from Delhi Kundli border) from a Nigerian national and he along with Petitioner-Varun used to consume and sell the said Heroin in the area of Nangal. It is further submitted that on perusal of account statement of A/c. No.0359000101077214 of Petitioner-Varun, obtained from Punjab National Bank, branch Nangal, it has been revealed that an amount of Rs.4,71,051/-have been transferred by the Petitioner-Varun on different dates through UPI (Google Pay) to respondent No.8Vishal Sharma. It is further submitted that on further perusal of A/c. No.34278363782 of Om Wati (mother of petitioner) obtained from State Bank of India, branch Naya Nangal, it has been revealed that an amount of

¶28

LAVISHA 2025.11.10 18:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC, Chandigarh

¶29

CRM-M-16253-2025 (O&M)

¶30

-3-

¶31

Rs.4200/- has been transferred in the account of respondent No.8-Vishal Sharma and an amount of Rs.66,900/- has been transferred in the account of respondent No.7-Rohit Kumar. It is further submitted that Rohit Kumar has also transferred an amount of Rs.49,000/-from his account in the aforementioned account of Om Wati (mother of the petitioner).

¶32

8. That it is further submitted that during inquiry carried out in the present case, no amount is found to be transferred in the accounts of Respondent No.5 and 6 (Umesh Bakshi and Himmat Bakshi). It is respectfully submitted that during inquiry it has been found that Petitioner-Varun was indulged in drugs peddling with respondent No.8-Vishal Sharma and therefore, PetitionerVarun has been nominated as accused in FIR No.08 of 2025, registered under Section 21(c), 27 and 27 of NDPS Act, 1985, at Police Station Anti-Narcotics Task Force, Sector-79, Mohali, on the basis of interrogation of the respondent No.8-Vishal Sharma.It has also been found during inquiry that respondent No.8-Vishal Sharma and Petitioner-Varun were jointly carrying out the drug peddling and have invested the amount in drugs. It is further submitted that respondent No.7-Rohit Kumar had also taken amount from Petitioner-Varun, however, as per the statement of respondent No.7-Rohit Kumar, he has returned the amount to Petitioner-Varun partly by transferring the same in the account of his mother-Om Wati and partly by way of cash. It has been found during inquiry that the Petitioner-Varun was never induced by respondent No.5 to 8 to deliver amount to them on the pretext of doubling the same, rather the amount was either lent by the Petitioner-Varun to respondent No.7Rohit Kumar or shared by him with respondent No.8Vishal Sharma in purchasing drugs /heroin.

¶33

9. It is further respectfully submitted that PetitionerVarun did not appear before the Inquiry Officer despite specific directions dated 09.07.2025, passed in the present petition, therefore, both the parties (i.e. Petitioner-Varun and respondent No.5 to 8), could not be inquired together by the Inquiry Officer.”

¶34

Prima facie, this Court is of the view that it is not required to go

¶35

into the factual aspects narrated in the present petition or in the

¶36

LAVISHA 2025.11.10 18:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC, Chandigarh

¶37

-4-

¶38

CRM-M-16253-2025 (O&M)

¶39

representations allegedly submitted by the petitioner. This conclusion is drawn after perusal of the response/status report filed on record by learned State counsel, wherein conduct of the petitioner itself has been found to be doubtful.

¶40

In view of the circumstances noticed and discussed here above, this Court finds no ground to entertain the prayer made in the present petition. Accordingly, present petition stands dismissed .

¶41

(SANJAY VASHISTH) 10.11.2025 JUDGE Lavisha Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No

¶42

LAVISHA 2025.11.10 18:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC, Chandigarh

Varun v. State of Punjab and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Varun v. State of Punjab and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Andeep Agro Feeds through Its Proprietor Vs Gurmeet Lal

Kavita Sachdeva Alias Kavita and Another Vs State of Punjab

Dilawar Singh Vs Bhim Singh

Annu (Minor) Vs State of Haryana and Others

Jaswinder Saroay Vs Manish Saroay

Gurdeep Singh Alias Labhu Vs State of Punjab