The Punjab and Haryana High Court on Saturday stayed all further proceedings arising from an FIR registered against AMP Motors Pvt Ltd, in a criminal case relating to a Range Rover vehicle that was brought to the dealership for repair and servicing.
Stay order and next hearing
The single-judge bench of Justice Sumeet Goel directed that no further action be taken in connection with the FIR until the next hearing, which is scheduled for 3 September 2026. The stay was granted on a petition filed by Bhupinder Singh Anand and seven others, who sought quashing of the FIR and protection against coercive steps.
Allegations, legal provisions and parties
The FIR in question was registered on 30 August 2025 at Police Station Sohana, SAS Nagar and invokes Sections 318(4) (cheating) and 351(2) (criminal intimidation) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS). The petitioners contest both the substance of the allegations and the police action.
Counsel for the petitioners — Advocates Sumit Gehlot, Manju Gehlot and Rahul Garg — appeared before the court. The State was represented through Additional Advocate General Punjab Adhiraj Singh Thind, who accepted notice on behalf of the government.
Claims in the petition
The petition sets out a chronology originating on 20 November 2024, when a Range Rover belonging to Sukhmaa Sons of Vijay Maan was brought to AMP Motors’ Gurugram showroom for routine repairs. According to the petitioners, during the servicing a minor scratch appeared on the front-left bumper and part of the paint protection film (PPF) peeled off. AMP Motors personnel reportedly offered to replace the PPF on the entire front bumper.
The petitioners contend that the criminal case registered in Punjab is a second, allegedly false, complaint arising from the same vehicle dispute. They assert that the complainant, Hari Om, falsely claimed that the vehicle had been sold by AMP Motors, whereas the dealership never sold the car. The petition argues the Punjab police lack territorial jurisdiction over the FIR and that the allegations are fabricated.
Court directions to police
The court directed the Station House Officer of Police Station Sohana to inform the complainant, Hari Om, about the pendency of the petition and the date of the next hearing, and to file a compliance report in the court. Notice of motion and interim relief were issued by the bench in response to the petitioners’ challenge to the FIR.
Why the jurisdictional question matters
Territorial jurisdiction is a recurring legal issue where civil or commercial disputes spill into criminal proceedings. If the police are found to have acted outside their territorial competence, prosecutions can be quashed and procedural remedies ordered. The petitioners' challenge places both the factual merits of the complaint and the procedural propriety of police action before the High Court.
Implications for the parties
The stay forestalls any coercive action against AMP Motors and the petitioners while the court examines the question. It also requires the complainant and the investigating officers to explain the basis for initiating criminal proceedings in the Punjab police station.
- FIR registered: 30 August 2025 at Police Station Sohana, SAS Nagar
- Vehicle brought for servicing: 20 November 2024 to AMP Motors’ Gurugram showroom
- Next hearing: 3 September 2026 before the Punjab and Haryana High Court
| Item | Date / Detail |
|---|---|
| Vehicle servicing | 20 November 2024 |
| FIR registration | 30 August 2025 (Police Station Sohana, SAS Nagar) |
| High Court stay order | 15 August 2026 (stay until next hearing) |
| Next court date | 3 September 2026 |
The stay does not amount to a determination on the merits; it preserves the position of the parties pending a fuller hearing. The court will examine the petitioners’ challenge, the territorial jurisdiction of the investigating police, and the factual assertions relating to the vehicle’s ownership and the origin of the complaint.
Both legal observers and motor vehicle dealers in the region note that disputes over repairs, alleged damage and ownership can rapidly escalate into criminal complaints, particularly where parties perceive no effective civil remedy. The outcome of the High Court’s deliberations may therefore be watched closely by dealerships and consumers in Haryana and neighbouring Punjab.
