Single judge allowed a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and quashed an FIR and subsequent proceedings after police recommended cancellation, noting the accused were not guilty and a police investigation was already completed.
FIR No.27 dated 19.4.2004 and all subsequent proceedings arising out of the same are quashed.
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.
In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh
Criminal Misc. No.M-23179 of 2012 (O&M)
Date of decision:12.12.2014
Baldev Singh, ASI and another
...Petitioners
v.
State of Punjab and another
...Respondents
Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Inderjit Singh
.....
Present: Mr. H.S. Batth, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr. A.S. Klar, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab for the respondent-State.
Inderjit Singh, J.
This criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR No.27 dated 19.4.2004 registered for the offence under Section 218 IPC at Police Station Harike, District Tarn Taran and all subsequent proceedings arising out the same and also to set aside the order dated 5.4.2012 (Annexure-P.7) passed by the learned trial Court, whereby the cancellation report has not been accepted and has ordered to further investigate by some higher officer above the rank of SSP, Tarn Taran.
It is mainly stated in the petition that the above mentioned FIR has been registered against the petitioners on the order dated 3.1.2004
HARPAL SINGH PARMAR 2014.12.24 17:23 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh
Cr. Misc. No.M-23179 of 2012 (O&M) [2]
passed by the Court of learned Special Judge, Ferozepur. The investigation in this case has been conducted by the Police and it has come out that the petitioners are innocent and no case is made out against them. It has been recommended that the cancellation report may be submitted in this case before the trial Court for cancellation of the FIR. The SSP in this case has sought the legal opinion from the DA Legal. The DA Legal has given his opinion that since the accused in FIR No.35 of 2001, in which it has been alleged that the petitioners had tried to save the accused from punishment, were convicted and the judgment has attained finality, no further investigation report was submitted in that case. On the basis of legal opinion, a cancellation report has been submitted before the learned trial Court. The learned trial Court has rejected the cancellation report and ordered to re-investigate the case. The Senior Superintendent of Police again examined the case and has accepted the cancellation report. It would be relevant to mention here that the report was submitted by the Investigating Officer and was forwarded by the DSP concerned and SP(D) Tarn Taran. Respondent No.2 has also submitted an affidavit before the learned trial Court, whereby it has been stated that he has agreed with the cancellation report and that if the same is accepted, then he would have no objection. The learned trial Court has again rejected the cancellation report submitted by the Police and ordered for further investigation of the case by some higher officers above the rank of SSP, Tarn Taran. It is also submitted in the petition that it is an admitted fact that the occurrence is dated 9.6.2001 and the FIR was ordered to be
HARPAL SINGH PARMAR 2014.12.24 17:23 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh
Cr. Misc. No.M-23179 of 2012 (O&M) [3]
registered vide order dated 3.1.2004 by the Court of Special Judge, Ferozepur with the allegations that the petitioners have tried to save the accused from the punishment. After the investigation, it was found that the petitioners were not guilty. It is also stated that even the learned Judge of Special Court, Ferozepur has discharged the petitioners from the case for the offence under Section 120-B IPC and the accused named in the FIR has been charge-sheeted and the said accused in that FIR have been convicted.
Notice of motion in this case was issued.
Mr. A.S. Klar, learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab
has put in appearance on behalf of the respondent-State and contested this petition.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record.
From the record, I find that first of all, two times the Police recommended and produced cancellation report before the learned Judicial Magistrate and the Magistrate has rejected the cancellation report and asked for further investigation. The Court time and again rejected the cancellation report produced by the Police. Secondly, there is allegation that the present petitioners have got registered a false FIR in Excise Act case against the accused of FIR No.83 dated 9.6.2001 for the offence under Section 15 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as `the Act') to save them from the conviction in this case. As stated in the petition, the present petitioners have been
HARPAL SINGH PARMAR 2014.12.24 17:23 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh
Cr. Misc. No.M-23179 of 2012 (O&M) [4]
discharged for the offence under Section 120-B IPC. Further more, the accused in the other FIR have already been convicted in Excise Act and that judgment has become final which means that the Court has not found that FIR is a false one or because of the NDPS Act, FIR has been falsely registered in that case to save them from the conviction under the NDPS Act. Otherwise also, there is a secret information with the Police party that a truck bearing registration No.PB-05E-9457 was coming from Kot Isse Khan to Harike, being driven by Harjit Singh loaded with poppy husk concealed beneath cement bags and it was also informed that Bohar Singh was also sitting on the back of truck above cement bags. The Police party sent Ruqa' and Naka' was also laid. As per the allegations in case FIR No.83 of 2001 registered for the offence under Section 15 of the NDPS Act, the driver of the truck stopped the truck 40-50 `Karams' behind the Police party. Harjit Singh, driver and Bohar Singh succeeded in absconding. The allegations are that ASI Balbir Singh, to whom he was earlier known, identified them. On the other hand on 8.6.2001, ASI Baldev Singh is stated to have registered case against Bohar Singh bearing FIR No.35 of 2001 for the offence under Section 61 of the Punjab Excise Act for possessing 20 bottles of illicit liquor, in which he was convicted and was released on probation by the concerned Court. The FIR was registered against the present petitioners that is for falsely registering the FIR for the offence under Section 61 of the Punjab Excise Act to save the real accused. As already discussed, since accused Bohar Singh has already been convicted and released on probation and the
HARPAL SINGH PARMAR 2014.12.24 17:23 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh
Cr. Misc. No.M-23179 of 2012 (O&M) [5]
judgment has become final, therefore, the continuation of the proceedings of the present FIR is nothing but an abuse of the process of the law. The Police after two Police investigations has already recommended cancellation of the FIR. The Court while convicting Bohar Singh under the Excise Act, no where stated that he has been falsely implicated nor there is any such finding of the trial Court.
Therefore, from the above, I find merit in the present petition and the same is allowed and FIR No.27 dated 19.4.2004 registered for the offence under Section 218 IPC at Police Station Harike, District Tarn Taran and all subsequent proceedings arising out the same are hereby quashed.
December 12, 2014.
(Inderjit Singh) Judge
hsp
HARPAL SINGH PARMAR 2014.12.24 17:23 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the First Information Report registered under Section 218 IPC should be quashed as it is an abuse of the process of the law after police recommended cancellation.
Whether the continuation of proceedings against the petitioners constitutes an abuse of process given conflicting findings and final convictions in connected cases.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Baldev Singh
ASI and another
State of Punjab
Inderjit Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
