Kulwnder Kaur v. State Of Punjab And Others

-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 122-2 Decided on :10.02.2026 Kulwnder Kaur . . . Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab and others . . . Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH

Present:

Mr. Vikas Bali, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Neeraj Madaan, Sr. DAG, Punjab.

Mr. P.S. Ahluwalia, Sr. Advocate with Mr. H.S. Randhawa, Advocate and Mr. R.S. Brar, Advocate for respondent No.6.

**** SANJAY VASHISTH , J. (Oral) 1.

The instant petition has been filed by petitioner under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for entrustment of the investigation of case bearing FIR No. 329 dated 02.12.2020 registered under Sections 21, 61, 85 of NDPS Act, registered at Police Station Basti Bawa Khel, District Jalandhar (Annexure P-1) to an independent agency like CBI. 2.

As per the facts recorded in FIR, petitioner's daughter Gagandeep Kaur wife of Ranjit Singh, while travelling in vehicle bearing registration No. PB08-AZ-1442 make Ford Fiesta along with her husband Ranjit Singh, was intercepted by the police team and thereupon, conducting search of the car, 60 tablets of ADDNOK-N containing salt of buprenorphine hydrochloride were recovered along with 3.20 grams of

-2Heroin, which was placed below the seat of driver Ranjit Singh. Consequently impugned FIR (mentioned hereinabove) was registered against Gagandeep Kaur.

3.

While issuing notice to respondents vide order dated 11.12.2020, Coordinate Bench of this Court directed the Investigating Agency to examine the CCTV footage in respect of the cameras installed at Police Station Bawa Khel, Commissionierate, Jalandhar pertaining to the period from 01.12.2020 till 05.12.2020 be preserved and be examined thoroughly while investigating the case. Order dated 11.12.2020 reads as under:- "Notice of motion for 05.02.2021.

Status report be filed on or before the next date of hearing.

It is further directed that the CCTV footage in respect of the cameras installed at Police Station Basti Bawa Khel, Commissionerate, to period Jalandhar pertaining from 01.12.2020 till 05.12.2020 be preserved and be examined thoroughly while investigating the case. It is further ordered that the call details in respect of the telephone maintained by the petitioner's daughter and the petitioner's son-in-law i.e. respondent No.6-Ranjit Singh be also obtained and be preserved and be examined thoroughly during the course of investigation. The Investigating Agency shall also examine the contents of the pen drive and the CD, which are attached with the petition.

Counsel for the petitioner shall furnish copy of the same to the learned State counsel within a week from today." 4.

Thereupon SIT was constituted and two reports dated 05.01.2021 and 08.02.2021 (prepared by SIT), were made part of affidavit dated 18.02.2021 of Mr. Arun Saini, PPS, Deputy Commissioner of Police (Hqrs), Police Commissionerate, Jalandhar in compliance of the

-3abovesaid order. Further, conclusion drawn by the SIT, is detailed in paragrah Nos.9 & 10 of the abovesaid reply/affidavit typed dated 18.02.2021 and attested on 19.02.2021.

5.

Relying upon the abovesaid SIT report, learned State counsel as well as learned counsel for respondent No.6 submits that the prayer made by the petitioner in the instant case has already been duly considered by this Court and thereupon, as per direction dated 11.12.2020, SIT report has been submitted which in fact, has gone against the petitioner's daughter herself and the other co-accused Manjit Singh. Trial, qua both of them is already pending before the learned Trial Court and after considering the allegations on prima facie basis, charges have also been framed on 16.09.2025.

Taking note of the developments which in fact took places after filing of the petition and have been recorded hereinabove, this Court is of the view that the controversy as to whether, petitioner's daughter is actually involved or not in the incident, cannot be adjudicated while exercising the powers of Section 482 of Cr.P.C./528 of BNSS, 2023. Moreover, majorly prayer for entrusting investigating to an independent investigation/inquiry already taken care of, and has been adhered by this Court in its earlier order dated 11.12.2020, therefore, no case is made out for transfer of investigation to any other agency. 6.

Any other plea which is factual in nature, requires to be established before the learned Trial Court at relevant stage. It is for trial Court to decide the issue after having complete set of evidence before it.

-47.

Accordingly, petition is dismissed.

8.

Pending applications, if any, stands closed accordingly. (SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE 10.02.2026 ankit Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether Reportable:

Yes/No