The court ruled that an FIR cannot be quashed based on allegations of mala fides if it discloses cognizable offences, emphasizing the necessity of a trial to assess the truth of the allegations.

JUDGMENT :

Rakesh Kainthla, J.

The petitioners have filed the present petition for quashing of criminal proceedings pending before learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Baijnath, District Kangra (learned Trial Court) in a case titled State of H.P. versus Satish Kumar and others arising out of FIR No. 5/2024 dated 3^rd January 2024 registered for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 341, 147, 149, 504, and 506 of Indian Penal code ( IPC ) at Police Station, Baijnath District Kangra, HP. (The parties shall hereinafter be referred to in the same manner in which they are arrayed before the learned Trial Court for convenience).

2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present petition are that Sunny Kumar (informant) and Chaman Kumar were going to Delhi on 24^th December 2023 in a bus bearing registration No. DD-01R-9971. When the bus reached Palampur, a passenger sitting behind them started misbehaving with them. They also had arguments with the driver and conductor. They got off the bus at Kalu Di Hatti. The bus left for Delhi. When they were returning to their home, they received a call from the mobile number xxx6008 and the caller started abusing them. The caller asked them to stop at Palampur, where they would be given suitable treatment. They disconnected the call, however, the caller started calling them from a different mobile numbers. When they reached Tashi Jong on 24^th December 2023 at 10:15 PM, a vehicle bearing registration number HP-53A-5009 stopped them. Another vehicle was also parked on the spot but the informant could not read its registration number. Satish @ Sattu came out of the vehicle bearing registration number HP-53A-5009 with 5-6 people. They had the baseball bats with them. They gave beatings to the informant and Chaman. The assailants were intoxicated. Both parties suffered injuries in the incident. The police registered the FIR and conducted the investigation. Police seized the baseball bat, recorded the statements of the witnesses and filed a charge sheet against the accused for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 341, 147, 149, 504, and 506 of IPC .

3. Being aggrieved by the registration of the FIR and the consequential proceedings, the petitioners have filed the present petition for quashing the FIR and the criminal proceedings arising out of it. It was asserted that the informant had lodged a false FIR against the petitioners. The informant and Chaman Lal boarded the bus from Tashi Jong to Delhi. They were drunk. They started misbehaving with fellow passengers. The driver and conductor tried to intervene but the informant and Chaman Lal assaulted the driver and conductor. Ashwani also assaulted one passenger named Kaushal Ahuja. When all the passengers protested, the informant party got off the bus. Petitioner no. 1 is the owner of the bus. The driver and conductor informed him about the incident. The informant party called petitioner No. 1 and asked him to refund their money. They asked him to meet at Tashi Jong. When the petitioners reached Tashi Jong with petitioners Nos. 2 to 5, the informant party assaulted them. Petitioners No. 1 to 4 were taken to the hospital, where they were examined for the injuries sustained by them. Their injuries were found to be grievous. The informant lodged a false FIR with a mala fide intention and as a counterblast to the FIR No. 239 of 2023, which was registered against the informant party. Therefore, it was prayed that the present petition be allowed and FIR and criminal proceedings arising out of it be quashed.

4. I have heard M/s Pawan K Sharma and Tim Saran, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Ajit Sharma, learned Deputy Advocate General for Respondent No. 1/State.

5. Mr. Pawan K Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the FIR is false and a counterblast to the FIR lodged against the informant party. The petitioners had sustained grievous injuries. The continuation of the criminal proceedings again