Punjab and Haryana HC Dismisses Petition Seeking SIT into Alleged Murder of Devinder Kaur, Accepts Police Evidence She Is Alive in Canada

The court found passport records, immigration data, and WhatsApp video calls with close relatives sufficient to conclude that Devinder Kaur is alive and residing in Canada, rejecting the uncle's plea for a Special Investigation Team.

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh has dismissed a Section 482 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 petition filed by Atma Singh, the maternal uncle of a woman named Devinder Kaur, who alleged that she had been murdered by her NRI father and his nephew. Justice Surya Partap Singh, sitting singly, pronounced the judgment on 5 June 2026 after reserving it on 15 May 2026. The court accepted a detailed affidavit sworn by a senior IPS officer, supported by passport records, immigration exit-entry data, and WhatsApp video calls in which two close relatives of Devinder Kaur identified her live on screen, and concluded that no case for further investigation or constitution of a Special Investigation Team had been made out.

A Family Dispute That Culminated in an FIR for Murder

The background to the petition stretches back decades. According to the petitioner, his sister Harpal Kaur married Balbir Singh in 1978. Their only child was Devinder Kaur. In 1985, Balbir Singh settled in Germany and, without informing Harpal Kaur or their daughter, contracted a second marriage with one Kulvir Kaur. The relationship between Harpal Kaur and Balbir Singh soured when she learnt of this marriage.

In 2012, the petitioner alleged, Balbir Singh hatched a conspiracy and arranged the marriage of Devinder Kaur with one Jagmohan Singh on 29 October 2012, again without informing Harpal Kaur or her family. In January 2013, Balbir Singh travelled to India with his nephew Sarabjit Singh following the death of his father. Atma Singh and his father attended the funeral on 18 and 19 January 2013. Harpal Kaur, present at the time, requested the family to intervene and settle matters with Balbir Singh.

After the funeral rituals concluded, the petitioner's father visited Balbir Singh's house only to find it locked. A caretaker at the premises told him that Balbir Singh and Sarabjit Singh had already departed for Germany on 31 January 2013, and that Harpal Kaur had left the house on 29 January 2013 on the representation of Balbir Singh that she had gone to her parental home. Neither Harpal Kaur nor Devinder Kaur was traceable.

The petitioner's father lodged a missing report at Police Station Dakha, District Ludhiana, vide DDR No. 17 dated 3 February 2013. This was eventually converted into FIR No. 37 dated 18 February 2013 for offences punishable under Sections 302, 201 and 34 IPC. Balbir Singh and others were arrayed as accused. The FIR also carried a passing reference to the fact that Devinder Kaur was missing.

Thirteen Years of Alleged Police Inaction

The petitioner's case before the court was that the investigation had been conducted in a lopsided and half-hearted manner from the outset. For nine years, until 2021, neither Balbir Singh nor Sarabjit Singh was arrested, and both were eventually declared proclaimed offenders. They were finally arrested on 29 October 2021 and are facing trial for the offence under Section 302 IPC.

On the question of Devinder Kaur specifically, the petitioner alleged that the investigating agency recorded the statement of her husband, Jagmohan Singh, who claimed that on 25 January 2013, at the Ludhiana bus stand, Devinder Kaur struck him with a bag and fled in a white car. The petitioner's case was that this account was inherently unbelievable and that, despite its implausibility, the police accepted it and closed the investigation into Devinder Kaur's disappearance without making any genuine effort to trace her.

Senior Advocate Mr. Jasdeep S. Gill, appearing for the petitioner with Ms. Harleen Kaur, Advocate, contended before the court that thirteen years had elapsed since the incident and still neither Devinder Kaur's whereabouts had been established nor had the accused been prosecuted for her murder. Counsel argued that the accused, being NRI and wealthy individuals who stood in a fiduciary relationship with the missing girl as her father and cousin, had benefited from police inaction. He submitted that once a missing report was lodged and upgraded into an FIR for murder of the mother, the investigating agency had a paramount duty either to trace Devinder Kaur or to prosecute those responsible for her death as well.

Counsel further contended that the status report filed by the respondents before the court introduced an altogether new and belated theory—that Devinder Kaur was alive and settled in Canada on the strength of a valid Indian passport—yet even in that status report the police had not disclosed her current address in Canada.

The State's Answer: Passport Records, Immigration Data, and a Video Call

The State was represented by Mr. J.S. Thind, DAG, Punjab. Mr. Amandeep Singh Rai, Advocate, appeared for Balbir Singh. The State's position, set out in a status report dated 22 February 2025 and an affidavit sworn by Dr. Ankur Gupta IPS, the then Superintendent of Police, District Ludhiana (Rural), was that the petition was built on false facts and constituted a misuse of the court's process.

According to the State, the investigating agency had traced Devinder Kaur and a senior police officer had personally spoken to her. The affidavit of Dr. Ankur Gupta detailed a structured verification exercise. On 29 January 2025, the DSP, Sub-Division Dakha, Ludhiana (Rural) conducted a WhatsApp video call with Devinder Kaur. During this call, her maternal aunt Naseeb Kaur and her cousin Santokh Singh positively identified the person on the screen as Devinder Kaur. The entire call was recorded and preserved as part of the case record.

Separately, the statement of Naseeb Kaur was recorded before a predecessor officer, Navneet Singh Bains IPS, on 19 February 2025, in which she stated that Devinder Kaur was alive and residing in Canada, that she had seen a photograph and passport of Devinder Kaur, and could confirm the photograph was of Devinder Kaur. The statement of another relative, Karamjeet Kaur (cousin and father's brother's daughter of Devinder Kaur), was also recorded; she too identified Devinder Kaur on a WhatsApp video call and confirmed her presence in Canada.

On the documentary side, the investigating agency verified passport details with the Regional Passport Office, Chandigarh, and the Foreign Regional Registration Officer (FRRO), Bureau of Immigration, Amritsar. It was found that Devinder Kaur held Indian passport No. K2166106, issued on 15 May 2012 and valid until 14 May 2022. She subsequently renewed her passport in Vancouver, Canada, and was issued new passport No. V-5291832 dated 10 February 2022, valid until 9 February 2032.

Immigration records confirmed that Devinder Kaur left India on 26 January 2013 and returned on 22 September 2016. She travelled abroad again on 2 October 2016 and returned to India on 14 January 2024, before leaving once more on 15 February 2024. The State argued that these facts, taken together, proved beyond doubt that she was alive, and that since she was alive, no prosecution of Balbir Singh or Sarabjit Singh for her murder could proceed.

The Court's Reasoning

Justice Surya Partap Singh examined the record carefully and addressed the core contention: whether there was any credible basis to conclude that the investigating agency had acted with laxity or had deliberately shielded the accused from prosecution in relation to Devinder Kaur.

The court found that the affidavit of Dr. Ankur Gupta IPS was sworn by a senior officer and was supported by multiple independent strands of evidence: the identification of Devinder Kaur on video call by two close relatives in real time; the recorded statements of those relatives; verified passport records; and immigration exit-entry records showing that she had visited India in 2016 and again in 2024, well after her alleged disappearance in January 2013.

The court observed that there was nothing on record that would justify disbelieving the affidavit. The cumulative effect of the evidence made it apparent that every possible effort had been made by the investigating agency to trace Devinder Kaur's whereabouts, and that the petitioner's claim of her murder was, in the court's words, “only the figment of imagination of the petitioner.”

On the legal consequence, the court held that since Devinder Kaur was alive, the question of prosecuting anyone for her murder did not arise. The plea that there had been laxity or a deliberate attempt not to prosecute Balbir Singh for the murder of Devinder Kaur was therefore not sustainable.

The court also found that the petitioner had not placed before it any sound ground that would warrant either further investigation into the matter or the constitution of a Special Investigation Team. The petition was accordingly held to be devoid of merits.

Outcome

Justice Surya Partap Singh dismissed CRM-M-24454-2024 on 5 June 2026. All other pending applications arising out of the petition were disposed of simultaneously. The judgment was marked as a speaking and reasoned order, though it was not marked reportable.