JASWINDER SINGH AND ANOTHER vs STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS — CRM-M/14360/2026

Disposed: --DISMISSED on 13th May 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: PHHC010430722026

Filing Number

CRM-M/18232/2026

Filing Date

12-Mar-2026

Registration No

CRM-M/14360/2026

Registration Date

13-Mar-2026

Judge

Ms. Justice Mandeep Pannu

Coram

Ms. Justice Mandeep Pannu

Bench Type

Single

Category

38.1 - QUASHING PETITIONS I/O ( 152 )

Judicial Branch

CRIMINAL BRANCH

Decision Date

13-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

--DISMISSED

Last updated 01-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.JASWINDER SINGH AND ANOTHER

    Adv. PIYUSH SETIA

  2. 2.JASWINDER SINGH

  3. 3.HARDEV SINGH

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

  2. 2.JASWINDER SINGH

  3. 3.HARDEV SINGH

  4. 4.SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICER SRI MUKTSAR SAHIB

  5. 5.PATWARI HALQA

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 13-May-2026

    Ms. Justice Mandeep PannuView PDF

    Case Summary: CRM-M/14360/2026 The Punjab & Haryana High Court dismissed petitioners Jaswinder Singh and Hardev Singh's petition to quash an FIR for allegedly demolishing a functional watercourse without authorization. The court held that the petitioners' factual contentions—regarding incorrect outlet numbers, non-existent killa references, and the civil nature of the dispute—involve disputed questions requiring evidence appreciation at trial, not at the quashing stage. Since no grounds for abuse of process were established and material supporting the allegations existed, the petition was dismissed, leaving all merits for determination by the trial court. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 12-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRM-M/14360/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: CRM-M/14360/2026 The Punjab & Haryana High Court dismissed petitioners Jaswinder Singh and Hardev Singh's petition to quash an FIR for allegedly demolishing a functional watercourse without authorization. The court held that the petitioners' factual contentions—regarding incorrect outlet numbers, non-existent killa references, and the civil nature of the dispute—involve disputed questions requiring evidence appreciation at trial, not at the quashing stage. Since no grounds for abuse of process were established and material supporting the allegations existed, the petition was dismissed, leaving all merits for determination by the trial court. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case