The High Court of Punjab and Haryana dismissed a petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of an FIR. The court held that the matters were disputed questions of fact for the trial court and that a prima facie case existed.
The petition for quashing of FIR No.225 and consequential proceedings is hereby dismissed.
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.
Criminal Misc. No. M-10789 of 2010
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Criminal Misc. No. M-10789 of 2010 Date of decision:-18.07.2012
Nirmal Singh
...Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab and another
...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARESH KUMAR SANGHI
Present:Mr. Roopak Bansal, Advocate for the petitioner.
Ms. Harsimrat Rai, DAG Punjab.
NARESH KUMAR SANGHI J.(Oral)
Prayer in this petition, filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., is for quashing of FIR No.225 dated 29.06.2006, under Section 326, IPC, registered at Police Station, City, Moga.
Learned counsel contends that the petitioner had a love affair with Ms. Maninder Kaur Gaba and they performed their marriage on 26.8.2003 as per Hindu rites at Chamba in Himachal Pradesh. Respondent No.2, who is aunt of Ms. Maninder Kaur Gaba, was nourishing a grudge against the petitioner and as such lodged a false and frivolous complaint against him disclosing the offence punishable under Section 323 read with Section 34, IPC.
Criminal Misc. No. M-10789 of 2010
-2-
Later, the contents of the said complaint were found to be false by the police. Thereafter, on 11.5.2006, the respondent again moved a false and frivolous complaint to the Senior Superintendent of Police, Moga, with the averments that on 22.9.2005, the petitioner had quarreled with her (respondent No.2 ) as a result of which her teeths were broken. Resultantly, the present FIR was registered, which is a sheer abuse of the process of law. He further submits that without proper investigation, the report under Section 173, Cr.P.C. was filed and even the learned trial court without taking care of the fact that no prima facie case was made out, framed the charge under Section 326, IPC against the petitioner vide order dated 16.11.2006 and ordered for recording of the prosecution evidence, therefore, the FIR and the consequential proceedings may be quashed.
On the other hand, learned counsel for the State submits that the charges were framed by the learned trial court on 01.10.2006. The prosecution has already examined four witnesses. He further submits that the allegations levelled in the FIR and the subsequent investigation clearly established the involvement of the petitioner for having committed the offence punishable under Section 326, IPC, therefore, no case for quashing of the impugned FIR is made out.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and meticulously examined the material available on record.
Whatever has been argued by the learned counsel for the
Criminal Misc. No. M-10789 of 2010
-3-
petitioner, are disputed questions of fact, which are to be decided by the learned trial court. The charge for commission of the offence punishable under Section 326, IPC was framed and thereafter, the prosecution had already examined the four witnesses. Even otherwise, after perusal of the contents of the FIR, a prima facie case for proceeding against the petitioner is made out. Therefore, finding no merit in the petition, the same is hereby dismissed.
July 18, 2012 ( NARESH KUMAR SANGHI ) Vijay Asija JUDGE
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the FIR and consequential proceedings must be quashed on the ground of frivolity.
Whether a prima facie case for proceeding against the petitioner is made out.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Nirmal Singh
State of Punjab
NARSH KUMAR SANGHI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
