CHANDIGARH, Nov. 29 - A rather charged courtroom atmosphere greeted reporters on Friday as Justice Tribhuvan Dahiya delivered a key order in a long-running case tied to the 2015 protests following the Bargari sacrilege incident. The bench refused to quash FIR No. 207/2015 against former Ludhiana Municipal Councillor Daljit Singh Grewal and others, noting that the challenge had arrived “too early” because the trial court had not yet reached the stage of taking cognizance.
Background
The case dates back to 21 October 2015, when a protest erupted near Vishal Mega Mart Road in Ludhiana after statewide anger over the sacrilege of Sri Guru Granth Sahib. According to the FIR narrative (page 2), police alleged that MLA Simarjeet Singh Bains and his associates, including Grewal, violated prohibitory orders under Section 144 CrPC and even encouraged a vehicle to be driven toward a police team - a claim strongly denied by the accused.
Read also:- Allahabad High Court Flags Faulty Trap Procedures While Granting Bail to Labour Officer Accused
Years later, a government-appointed Inquiry Commission, led by a retired High Court judge, examined a series of allegedly politically motivated FIRs. The Commission concluded the case against Bains appeared to be “a clear case of political vendetta,” recommending cancellation of the FIR only in his regard (page 3). The police, however, filed a cancellation report for all accused, which the Magistrate rejected in 2019, ordering further investigation.
The police then submitted a supplementary chargesheet in 2021, placing Grewal and others in Column 3, meaning the case would proceed against them (page 4). This prompted the present petition to quash the FIR altogether.
Court’s Observations
Justice Dahiya carefully walked through the allegations, the political context, and the petitioners’ argument that nothing incriminating had been found after multiple rounds of investigation. Their counsel insisted that after the Inquiry Commission recommended dropping charges against one of the key accused, the entire case should have collapsed. They also invoked Section 195 CrPC - a technical provision that requires a written complaint from a public servant before courts can take cognizance of offences like obstructing police duty.
Read also:- Supreme Court stays Allahabad High Court order in sensitive POCSO matter, questions absence
But the judge took a different view.
“The bench observed, ‘The bar under Section 195 CrPC is against taking cognizance, not against registration or investigation of an offence,’” referencing Supreme Court precedent discussed in depth on page 7.
He noted that the trial court has not yet reached the cognizance stage, and therefore any complaint about lack of authorisation under Section 195 CrPC was premature. Once the Magistrate reaches that stage, the petitioners are free to raise the objection. Until then, the FIR cannot simply be wiped out.
On the Commission’s recommendation, the court pointed out that the report was binding only as regards Simarjeet Singh Bains - not the other accused. The Magistrate’s 2019 order directing further investigation was also upheld as valid.
Read also:- Delhi High Court Grills Centre Over Indigo Flight Chaos, Demands Clear Accountability and Swift
Decision
Concluding the hearing, Justice Dahiya declined to quash the FIR or the Magistrate’s orders.
The court stated: petitioners may raise the Section 195 CrPC bar at the appropriate stage before the trial court, if they so wish, but the High Court will not intervene at this point (page 8).
With that, the matter now returns to the trial court, where the next phase will determine whether cognizance is taken and how the prosecution proceeds.
Case Title: Daljit Singh Grewal @ Bhola & Others vs. State of Punjab & Others
Case No.: CRM-M-23232-2023
Case Type: Petition under Section 482 CrPC (Quashing of FIR)
Decision Date: 29 November 2025
