Boor Singh vs The State Of Punjab on 4 February, 2009

 CRM No. M-637 of 2009                          1




    IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB &
              HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

                               CRM No. M-637 of 2009
                               Date of decision: 4.2.2009

Boor Singh                                    ...Petitioner

                               Versus

The State of Punjab                           ...Respondents


CORAM:       HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA

Present:     Mr. O.P. Arora, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Rajan Gupta, J.

This is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing

the FIR No.395 dated 20th November, 2008, under Sections 420, 467,

468, 471, 120-B IPC, registered at Police Station Sadar, Fazilka.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that Sub

Divisional Magistrate, Fazilka has given him a clean chit as is clear

from a perusal of his report, Annexure P-2. According to the counsel,

despite the report dated 22.2.2008, Annexure P-2, the instant FIR has

been registered against him on the basis of a letter written to Senior

Superintendent of Police/Deputy Commissioner, Ferozepur by the

complainant Balbir Singh. The counsel has further submitted that

Deputy Commissioner has wrongly came to the conclusion that the

petitioner had illegally changed the Girdawari in the name of Sukhdev

Kumar son of Mukand Lal to the extent of 2/3rd share and Darshan

Singh son of Gopal Singh to the extent of 1/3rd share while ownership of
CRM No. M-637 of 2009 2

the land was with the provincial government. According to the counsel,

the petitioner had changed the Girdawari strictly according to the

statement of legal heirs of Gopal Singh as attested by Gurcharan Singh,

the then Lambardar of village Ganj Bakshani.

After hearing the counsel for the petitioner, I am of the

considered view that there is no ground for quashing of the FIR in

question. The allegations levelled in the same are serious in nature.

The factual pleas raised by the petitioner cannot be gone into at this

stage while exercising inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

Essentially, the said pleas of the petitioner can be considered only after

the evidence is led before the trial court. The contention of the

petitioner that FIR could not be registered against him as S.D.M. Fazilka

had given him clean chit vide report, Annexure P-2, is devoid of any

merit and is hereby rejected.

In view of the above, this petition for quashing of FIR is

hereby dismissed. However, nothing observed herein above, shall be

considered to be an opinion on merits of the case.

(RAJAN GUPTA)
JUDGE
February 04, 2009
‘rajpal’