Abuse of process of the court by launching criminal prosecution on the same set of facts that were the subject of an arbitration award.

S. D. Bajaj, J.

1. Petitioner Kashmira Singh was serving as Secretary-cum-Cashier of Kanganwal Co- operative Agricultural Service Society Ltd. , in district Sangrur in the year 1984. In arbitration references under sec. 55 of the Punjab Co-operative Societies Act 1961 detailed in para 2 of Cr1. Misc. No: 3926-M of 1988, the arbitrator gave in all ten awards amounting to Rs.36,879/- against him. Petitioner has preferred appeals against these awards in terms of sec. 68 of the Act aforesaid, which are still pending.

2. Inspector in-charge of the Co-operative Societies, in connivance with its management, who are allegedly hostile to the petitioner, got First Information Report No.91 registered in police Station, Ahmedgarh against the petitioner on May 19, 1984 in respect of the amounts covered by the arbitration awards. On the basis of it a challan has been put up against the petitioner in the court of Shri P. C. Suman, Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Malerkotla. A copy of the charge framed against the petitioner by the learned trial court has been filed as Annexure P 3 to the petition.

3. I have heard Shri G. S. Bhatia, Advocate for the petitioner, Shri Subhir Sehgal, Advocate for the respondent and have care fully gone through the record.

4. It has been urged in the petition that through these references to arbitrator and the pronouncement of awards by the arbitrator in respect of it, the dispute has assumed a civil character and, therefore, the jurisdiction of the criminal court to try the petitioner is ousted thereby. The lodging of the First Information Report in respect of it and the resultant criminal prosecution of the petitioner on its basis are thus a clear abuse of the process of the court which needs to be checked by quashing of First Information Report No.91 dated May 19, 1984 and the resultant criminal prosecution launched against the petitioner on its basis.

5. The only question for determination in the proceedings is whether a prosecution could be launched against the petitioner on the same set of facts which were the subject-matter of the awards and in respect of which the arbitrator had already given an award of Rs.36,879.00 against the petitioner. The question was answered in the affirmative by D. S. Tewatia, (as his Lordship then was) in Harbans Singh V/s. State of Punjab and another. This judgment, as it emerges from a reading of para 5 was based on concession of the Deputy Advocate General and not on a legal interpretation. The view of this court in this regard has undergone a change in its later decisions. It has consistently been held in Harbhagwan Das V/s. Stare of Punjab, Hakam Singh V/s. State of Punjab, and Bant Singh V/s. The Dulley Cooperative Agricultural Services Society Ltd. , that in the light of the above noted facts it looks apparent that to proceed against the petitioner in a criminal Court on the same set of facts which were the subject matter of the award against him before the arbitrator, is the misuse of the process of Court.

6. In result the petition succeeds and is allowed. First Information Report No.91 dated May 19, 1984 registered against the petitioner in Police Station, Ahmedgarh, as also the criminal proceedings initiated against him on its basis in the court of Shri P. C. Suman, Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Malerkotla, are both quashed. Petition succeeded.