Point of Law: FIR is not meant to contain all details. It is only recording of information in respect of cognizable offence.

JUDGMENT :

Satyen Vaidya, J.

Heard.

2. By way of instant petition, petitioners have prayed for following substantive reliefs:-

1. That the FIR No. 23, dated 05.02.2017, Annexure P-1, registered with Police Station Theog, Distt. Shimla, H.P. against the present petitioners under Section 448, 323, 325 and Section 34 of IPC and all further proceedings including judicial proceedings, if any, arising out of it may be quashed and set aside.

2. That in alternate Annexure P-1 qua petitioner No.3 be quashed and set aside being not present at place of occurrence and was under training of Patwari at Kasauli during that period in view of the annexure P- in the end of justice and fair play.

3. That respondent No. 1 may be directed to take proper disciplinary action and other appropriate criminal proceedings against the official respondents especially respondent No. 3 for misusing their official powers in contravention of the law of the land and for further unduly harassing and intimidating the petitioners and further for subjecting the petitioners to wrongful confinement and illegal prosecution.

4. That the respondent State may be directed to institute appropriate criminal proceedings against all the private respondents for the illegal act and conduct committed by the said respondents as mentioned in the petitioners.

5. That the respondents may be directed to grant suitable compensation to the petitioners from the pockets of erring officials for which the petitioners had to suffer on account of illegal acts and conduct of the respondent.

3. Brief facts necessary for adjudication of the petition are that two cross FIRs bearing Nos. 22/2017 and 23/2017 came to be registered at Police Station Theog, District Shimla, H.P. on 05.02.2017. In FIR No. 22/2017, petitioner No.1 was the complainant and in FIR No. 23/2017, respondent No. 4 was the complainant. The dispute had arisen with respect to possession of Shop No.13, Vegetable Market, Theog. Both the sides had levelled cross allegations. On one hand, petitioner No. 1 claimed possession on the shop in question, on the other, respondent No. 4 claimed the same to be in his possession. The allegations of forcible dispossession and infliction of injuries were also levelled against each other.

4. Petitioners have prayed for quashing of FIR No. 23/2017, on the grounds that the same was false. Their possession on the Shop No.13 situated in Vegetable Market, Theog, was established. The FIR had been lodged against them by police in connivance with respondent No. 4. It has further been submitted on behalf of the petitioners that petitioner No. 3 was undergoing training on the date of alleged occurrence at Kasauli and was not present on the spot. Petitioner No. 2 is stated to be handicapped. It has further been alleged that FIR No. 22/2017 recorded at the instance of petitioner No. 1 has been investigated and cancellation report has been presented by the police in the Court.

5. It is revealed from the replies filed on behalf of the respondents that after investigation in FIR No. 23/2017, police found prima facie case against petitioners and challan was presented. Petitioners were charged and prosecution evidence is in the process being recorded.

6. The instant petition was filed by the petitioners on 15.01.2021. Noticeably, in para-8(v), petitioners themselves have averred that respondent No. 4 and his wife had been examined as prosecution witnesses before the date of filing of instant petition. Meaning thereby that petitioners were aware about the fact that the Court was already seized of the matter. It had framed the charge against the petitioners after taking cognizance. Still, no factual foundation was laid in the petition to challenge the material collected by the Investigating Agency during investigation as also the order passed by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, whereby the cognizance was taken and subsequently charges were framed. Petitioners have in their entire petition raised objections with respe