IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH.
Criminal Misc.2892-M of 2008
DATE OF DECISION : OCTOBER 23, 2008
ANGREJ SINGH ETC. ....... PETITIONER(S)
VERSUS
STATE OF PUNJAB & ANR. .... RESPONDENT(S)
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA
PRESENT: Mr. Kamal Narula, Advocate, for the petitioner(s).
Mr. KS Sidhu, DAG, Punjab.
Mr. Satish Sabharwal, Advocate, for respondent No.2.
AJAI LAMBA, J. (Oral)
This petition under Section 482, Code of Criminal Procedure,
seeks quashing of complaint titled ‘Smt. Sheelo v. Raj Singh and others’,
under Sections 436, 427, Indian Penal Code, pending in the court of
Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Ferozepur, as also order dated 17.7.2007,
passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Ferozepur.
On a consideration of facts, I find that the Magistrate
summoned Raj Singh and Gurmej Singh to stand trial for committing
offences under Sections 436, 427, Indian Penal Code. It has been observed
that there was no evidence to indicate involvement of the other accused as
they could not be identified. Therefore, four other persons named in the
complaint were not summoned.
Criminal Misc.2892-M of 2008 2
A revision was carried by the complainant, which has been
allowed. The order of the Magistrate has been modified. The revisional
court has observed that Makhan Singh husband of Sheelo-complainant
had corroborated the version of the complainant and he had stated that he
had identified all the accused, who had set the clothes on fire and caused
loss.
I have also taken note of the fact that an FIR was lodged.
After investigation, however, it was recommended to be cancelled. The
report has been considered by the Magistrate while dealing with the issue,
particularly noticing that the police report indicates that some occurrence
had taken place.
While exercising jurisdiction under Section 482, Code of
Criminal Procedure, in view of the nature of controversy, noticed above,
evidence cannot be taken by way of affidavit and counter affidavit to
judge the issue and record a finding that no occurrence had taken place, as
is made out from the perusal of the complaint or the orders of summoning.
In this view of the matter, the petition is dismissed.
October 23, 2008 ( AJAI LAMBA ) Kang JUDGE