The petition under Section 528 BNSS seeking quashing of an FIR and charge framing order was withdrawn as the parties reached a compromise.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
CRM-M-4754-2025 (O&M)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
150
CRM-M-4754-2025 (O&M) Decided on : 09.02.2026
Amarjit Singh Rajpal and another
. . . Petitioner(s)
Versus
State of Punjab and another
. . . Respondent(s)
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH
PRESENT: Mr. Tushar Madaan, Advocate for Mr. Vaibhav Garg, Advocate for the petitioner(s).
Mr. Vinay Malhotra, DAG, Punjab.
Ms. Manisha Nehra, Advocate for Mr. Vijay Pal, Advocate, for respondent No.2.
SANJAY VASHISTH, J. (Oral)
“ Present petition has been filed under Section 528 of BNSS, seeking quashing of impugned FIR NO.0035 dated 26.02.2021 (P-10), under Sections 420, 467, 468, 71, 120-B IPC, registered at Police Station Fatehgarh Sahib, District Fatehgarh Sahib. Further seeking issuance of appropriate order/direction for quashing of the impugned order dated 20.11.2024 (P-14) passed by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Fatehgahr Sahib and consequential proceedings.
Challenge is to the order of charge framed by learned Trial Court against the petitioner under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B and 201 IPC.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the real dispute is in regard to the cheque amount of Rs.15 lacs, which after being handed over to the complainant had bounced resulting into the filing of a complaint under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 by respondent No.2-Complainant.
JAWALA RAM 2026.02.12 14:52 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document
CRM-M-4754-2025 (O&M)
On same set of allegations, against the petitioner, one complaint had been moved by the complainant’s associate Jatinder Kumar (who is witness in the present FIR case) to the National Commission for Scheduled Castes (Punjab, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh and U.T. of Chandigarh), wherein the commission had proceeded against the petitioners by seeking report from the concerned Inspector General of Police, thereupon the complaint itself was withdrawn by Jatinder Kumar. It is subsequent to that stage, that complainant got lodged present FIR No.0035 dated 26.02.2021, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC, registered at Police Station, Fatehgarh Sahib. Earlier also, the charges were framed by learned Trial Court but by passing non-speaking order, however, said order was set aside by co-ordinate Bench of this Court by directing to pass a detailed order after examining the prima facie evidence.
The same Presiding officer has now re-decided the issue of framing of charges and therefore needs to be re-examined by this Court as rights of the petitioner got prejudiced.
Notice of motion for 23.04.2025.
Notice re:stay as well.
Petitioners and respondent No.2 be present before this Court on the date fixed.
To be taken up at 2:00 p.m.”
The aforesaid contention of learned counsel is fortified by the original copy of the compromise/settlement agreement dated 19.12.2025, attached with the instant petition, which is duly signed by all the respective parties.
Pending misc. application(s), if any, also stand(s) disposed of.
(SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE
February 09, 2026 J.Ram
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No
JAWALA RAM 2026.02.12 14:52 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Amarjit Singh Rajpal
another
State of Punjab
another
Sanjay Vashisth
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
