Amandeep Singh and Anr. Vs State of Punjab and Others

Prayer in the instant petition, filed under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023, is for issuance of direction to respondent No. 2 – Senior Superintendent of Police, Sangrur, to direct respondent No. 3 – Station House Officer (SHO), Police Station Bhawanigarh, District Sangrur, to ensure that the petitioners are not implicated in any false case, as the dispute inter se between the petitioners and private respondent No. 4 – Narinder Singh @ Nindi, is purely of civil nature. Further, there is prayer for protection of life and liberty of the petitioners and their family members, at the hands of respondent No. 4.

¶18

Today, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioners. When this petition came up for hearing on 05.04.2025, learned counsel for the petitioners made the following submissions, as recorded in the order dated 05.04.2025, passed by this Court:-

¶19

PRASHANT KAPOOR 2025.11.21 17:50 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgement

¶20

CRM-M-18725-2025 (O&M) 2

¶21

1. xxx xxx xxx

¶22

2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the dispute between the petitioner party and the private respondent No.4 is entirely of civil nature involving an amount of about Rs.35 lakhs.

¶23

3. Counsel further submits that in regard to the said civil dispute, already a civil suit for declaration is pending before the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division), Malerkotla titled as ‘Amandeep Singh and another vs. Narinder Singh @ Nindi’.

¶24

4. Unnecessarily, SHO, Police Station Bhawamigarh, District Sangrur – respondent No.3, has been doing whatsapp calls to the petitioners, calling them to police station and also issuing threats.

¶25

5. To substantial her submission, counsel prays for grant of some time to place some material on record.”

¶26

Further, by filing an application, i.e. CRM-30650-2025, the petitioners also placed on record the call details, to aver that respondent No. 3 – SHO, Police Station Bhawanigarh, District Sangrur, is calling them unnecessarily time and again and also pressurizing them.

¶27

As per the pleadings in the main petition, one agreement to sell, dated 02.08.2024 (Annexure P-1), was executed between the petitioners (being owner) and respondent No. 4 (purchaser), in regard to sale of some piece of land, for total sale consideration of Rs.1,45,54,000/-.

¶28

Respondent No. 4 failed to comply with the terms of the agreement to sell, i.e. to get the sale deed executed in time, therefore, after sending a legal notice dated 18.12.2024 (Annexure P-3), the petitioners filed a civil suit (Annexure P-4), for declaring the agreement to sell as null & void, not enforceable, and also for forfeiting of the earnest money of Rs. 35,00,000/-.

¶29

PRASHANT KAPOOR 2025.11.21 17:50 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgement

¶30

CRM-M-18725-2025 (O&M) 3

¶31

It has also been averred in the petition that instead of appearing in the Court, respondent No. 4 has approached the police authorities at Sangrur, and to harass the petitioners also filed false and frivolous complaints against them. In turn, respondent No. 3 – SHO has started calling the petitioners to the police station and also to appear before the SP(D), Sangrur.

¶32

The petitioners also made a representation dated 28.03.2025 (Annexure P-5), to respondent No. 2, specifically mentioning therein that the dispute is of civil nature and civil suit is pending in the court of Civil Judge (Junior Division), Malerkotla, but no heed has been taken. Resultantly, the petitioners have filed the present petition.

¶33

In compliance to the order dated 19.08.2025, passed by this Court, learned State counsel filed a status report, dated 19.11.2025, by way of affidavit of Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sub Division Bhawanigarh, District Sangrur, which is taken on record. Registry to tag the same at appropriate place.

¶34

Perusal of of the status report reveals that admittedly phone calls were made to the petitioners by the police, for joining of the inquiry into the complaint bearing PGD Number 528590, dated 13.02.2025, made by respondent No. 4 against the petitioners. Paragraph Nos. 5 to 9 of the status report are reproduced as under:-

¶35

“5. That it is respectfully submitted that during the pendency of the present petition, the petitioners filed application u/s 528 BNSS, in regard to which it is submitted that earlier the inquiry was conducted by the Deputy Superintendent of Police (Detective) Sangrur and then by the Superintendent of Police (Investigation), Sangrur and preliminary inquiry into the said allegation regarding the threat calls received by the petitioner as mentioned in the

¶36

PRASHANT KAPOOR 2025.11.21 17:50 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgement

¶37

CRM-M-18725-2025 (O&M)

¶38

4

¶39

present petition was conducted, it is pertinent to mention here that on dated 01.11.2025 the statement of HC Gurdeep Singh, was posted as Naib Reader with the Superintendent of Police (Investigation), Sangrur (now doing inter-med course at PPA Phillaur) has recorded his statement that he made call to the petitioners on mobile number 82840-04340 from his mobile number 85588-01388 on dated 05.04.2025 to get join the inquiry into the complaint given by the respondent no. 4 against the petitioners. Neither he knows him personally nor he made any threat call.

¶40

6. That it is respectfully submitted that during the pendency of the present petition, preliminary inquiry into the said allegation regarding the threat calls received by the petitioner as mentioned in the present petition was conducted, it is pertinent to mention here that on dated 05.11.2025 the statement of SC Jagsir Singh, posted as MHC PS Bhawanigarh, District Sangrur has recorded his statement that he made call to the petitioners on mobile number 82840-04340 from his mobile number 80545-45312 on dated 01.05.2025 to get join the inquiry into the complaint given by the respondent no. 4 against the petitioners. Neither he knows him personally nor he made any threat call.

¶41

7. That it is respectfully submitted that during the pendency of the present petition, preliminary inquiry into the said regarding the threat calls received by the petitioner as mentioned in the present petition was conducted, it is pertinent to mention here that on dated 05.11.2025 the statement of SC Sukhchain Singh, posted as MHC PS Dirba, District Sangrur has recorded his statement that he made call to the petitioners on mobile number 82840-04340 from his mobile on dated 16.05.2025 by mistake. Neither he knows him personally nor he made any threat call.

¶42

8. That it is respectfully submitted that during the pendency of the present petition, preliminary inquiry into the said regarding the threat calls received by the petitioner as mentioned in the present petition was conducted, it is pertinent to mention here that on dated 06.11.2025 the statement of ASI Rajinder Singh, posted as assistant MHC PS Bhawanigarh, District Sangrur has recorded his statement that he made call to the petitioner no. 1 on mobile number 82840-04340 from his mobile number 80546-01685 on dated 03.05.2025 in regarding to join the inquiry into the complaint no. PGD-528590 dated 13.02.2025 given by the respondent no, 4 against the petitioners. Neither he knows him personally nor he made any threat call.

¶43

PRASHANT KAPOOR 2025.11.21 17:50 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgement

¶44

CRM-M-18725-2025 (O&M) 5

¶45

9. That it is respectfully submitted that during the pendency of the present petition, preliminary inquiry into the said regarding the threat calls received by the petitioner as mentioned in the present petition was conducted, it is pertinent to mention here that on dated 06.11.2025 the statement of ASI Nirbhay Singh, has recorded his statement that he made call to the petitioner no. 1 on mobile number 82840-04340 from his mobile number 80546-01827 on dated 23.04.2025 in regarding to join the inquiry into the complaint no. PGD-528590 dated 13.02.2025 given by the respondent no. 4 against the petitioners. Neither he spoke any wrong words nor he made any threat call.”

¶46

However, no explanation is forthcoming in the status report

¶47

as to how the inquiry is being conducted by the police officials without registration of criminal case (FIR) or Daily Diary Report (DDR).

¶48

In view of above, the present petition is disposed of by directing the official respondents that without being satisfied of happening of any criminal case, the petitioners may not be unnecessarily harassed by calling them time and again to the police station, especially on the complaint, if any, presented, which contains the facts regarding civil dispute.

¶49

Nothing mentioned hereabove would be construed as an opinion or observation for or against the parties to the present petition. Still, in case there is any grouse of either of the parties against each other, it would be open for them to proceed in accordance with law, by approaching the concerned forum.

¶50

Petition stands disposed of.

¶51

(SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE

¶52

November 20, 2025 Pkapoor

¶53

PRASHANT KAPOOR 2025.11.21 17:50 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgement

Amandeep Singh and Anr. v. State of Punjab and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amandeep Singh and Anr. v. State of Punjab and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Suraj Vs State of Haryana

Gurwinder Kaur Vs State of Punjab and Another

Jagdish Gir Alias Jagdish Singh and Others Vs State of Punjab and Others

Kuldeep Vs State of Haryana

Raj Kumar Alias Golu Vs State of Haryana

Arun Baniwal @ Arun @ Jagira Vs State of Haryana