Jaspal Singh And Others vs State Of Punjab on 25 August, 2008

Punjab-Haryana High Court
Jaspal Singh And Others vs State Of Punjab on 25 August, 2008
Criminal Misc. No.25473-M of 2007                          -1-

                                    ****


IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
              AT CHANDIGARH

                       Criminal Misc. No.25473-M of 2007
                       Date of decision : 25.8.2008


Jaspal Singh and others

                                                     .....Petitioners

                       Versus
State of Punjab                                      ...Respondent

                             ****

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. D. ANAND

Present: Mr. Akshay Bhan, Advocate for the petitioner

           Ms. Manjari Nehru, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab.

                             ****

S. D. ANAND, J.

The present plea under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been

preferred by petitioners- accused Jaspal Singh, Harshwinder Singnh,

Jagdev Singh and Meharban Singh to obtain quashment of FIR No.

15 dated 21.1.2007 under Sections 379/447/506/511/34 IPC.

The following is the translated relevant extract of the First

Information Report which stands reproduced in the petition itself:-

“Stated that I am resident of above said address and I am

working as a Government contractor. I am married. My

father Jasbir Singh is working as Naib Tehsildar in the

department of SYL Patiala. My mother Taranjit Kaur is
Criminal Misc. No.25473-M of 2007 -2-

****

working as Senior Assistant in Punjab State Electricity

Board Head office at Patiala. I am only son and I also

have one sister who is married. I have done B.Sc. My

grand father are three brothers. My eldst grand father is

Kulwant Singh, younger them is Niranjan Singh and

youngest is Mohinder Singh. I had bought a plot from

Niranjan Singh brothyer of my grand father on 21.6.1999

at Loahori Gate, near to Vishwakarma Mandir. Vide

registration 43629 having area of 48.22 sq. yard at the

cost of Rs.72,500/- and I had also taken the possession.

I had also fixed an iron gate on the same. Today at

around 43 PM when I came to see my plot alongwith

Anwar son of Faqrudin who is having shop near the bus

stand of Patiala, I saw that outside my plot brother of

mygrand father Mohinder Singh and his son Jaspal Singh

Harshvinder Singh and Jasdev Singh @ Happy resident

of Naraingarh, Police Station Mukepur were sitting and

were raising the wall at front and the iron gate which was

fixed was also not there. This incident has been done

by brother of my grand father Mohinder Singh and his

sons Jaspal Singh, Harshvinder Singh and Jagdev Singh

with connivance with each other and have done so with

intention to take possession of my plot. They have also

stolen my iron gate. When I asked them about raising

the wall and regarding theft of iron gate, then above said
Criminal Misc. No.25473-M of 2007 -3-

****

persons said that run away from here otherwise you will

killed if you will come near to plot. Because of fear I ran

away from there. The above said incident has been done

by the above said person to take the illegal possession of

my plot. I alongwith my friend was going to inform the

same at Police Station and in the way you have met at

Arya Samaj Chowk. I have recorded my statement and

the same is true and correct. Legal action may kindly be

taken.”

Learned counsel, appearing on behalf of the petitioners,

argues that alleged incident is nothing but outcome of a family feud

and averments, in the course of the FIR, that an iron gate fixed on

the land under reference had been stolen and that the petitioners-

accused thereby entered into possession of his land is totally false.

The correctness of the above averment is re-iterated on

behalf of the respondents by D.S.P. City-I, Patiala who filed a

counter in the form of affidavit.

It would be apparent from a perusal of the above

discussion that there are disputed questions of fact which shall have

to be gone into by the learned Trial Court after the parties have had

an opportunity to adduce evidence in support of their respective plea.

This Court cannot undertake that exercise in exercise of jurisdiction

under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The petition shall stand dismissed.

However, the petitioner shall be at liberty to raise all the

relevant pleas before the learned Trial Court. Further, in view of the
Criminal Misc. No.25473-M of 2007 -4-

****

close relationship between the parties, it will be open to the

petitioners to file a plea for grant of exemption from personal

appearance which shall be appropriately disposed of by the learned

Trial Court in accordance with law.

August     25, 2008                           (S. D. ANAND)
Pka                                              JUDGE

Note: Whether to be referred to Reporter: Yes/No
Criminal Misc. No.25473-M of 2007 -5-

****

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes:

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *