Petitioner sought quashing of an illegal inquiry report recorded by a DSP without Magistrate approval after the investigation was closed and the final report submitted under Section 173 Cr.PC, under Section 482 Cr.PC.
The second inquiry report (Annexure P6) was quashed as illegal and without jurisdiction.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
CRM No.M-22730 of 2010 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
Date of Decision:-12.10.2010
Sarwan Singh son of Wassan Singh ...Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab and others ...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR
Present: Mr.Sarabjit Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr.Shilesh Gupta, D.A.G Punjab.
Mehinder Singh Sullar, J . (Oral)
The symposium of the facts, which needs a necessary mention for a limited purpose of deciding the core controversy raised in the present petition and emanating from the record, is that initially, in the wake of statement of complainant-Sampuran Singh (respondent No.4), the present case was registered against petitioner Sarwan Singh and his co-accused Sukhdev Singh son of Mukhtiar Singh, Tarsem Singh son of Wassan Singh, Paramjit Singh son of Sikattar Singh, Wassan Singh son of Harnam Singh and Dilbag Singh son of Kashmir Singh, vide FIR No.136 dated 6.12.2009 (Annexure P1), on accusation of having committed the offences punishable under sections 148, 427 and 447 read with section 149 IPC by the police of Police Station Verowal, Distt.Tarn Taran.
CRM No.M-22730 of 2010 2
CRM No.M-22730 of 2010 3
tried together with the accused, the Court may proceed against such person for the offence which he appears to have committed.” A co-joint reading of these provisions would reveal that once the trial Court is seized of the case, then the second DSP did not have the jurisdiction to re-enquire into the same matter of its own wish, completely bypassing the mandatory provisions of law. He cannot legally be permitted to initiate parallel proceedings, otherwise there will be no end of the litigation in this respect.
12.10.2010 (Mehinder Singh Sullar) AS Judge
2 issues framed by the court
Whether an inquiry report recorded by a DSP without Magistrate approval after the submission of final police report is legally valid.
Whether a second inquiry report can be used to initiate proceedings against a person already cleared in the final police report.
4 provisions across 1 enactments
Sarwan Singh
State of Punjab
Mehinder Singh Sullar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
