SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2009 Supreme(P&H) 1394

PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
T.S.Thakur and Hemant Gupta JJ.
Jai Singh
Versus
State Of Punjab
Civil Writ Petition No. 2552 of 2009,
Decided On : AUGUST 12, 2009

Headnote:(A) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.195(i) (a) & 482--Penal Code, 1860, S.188--Quashing of FIR--Cognizance of Offence--Police could investigate in to offence under Section 188 of IPC being cognizable offence--But Court could not take cognizance except on complaint of public servant--Public servant moved the Court to take cognizance of matter--No illegality in lodging of FIR. (P.17)

       (B) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.195(i)(a)--Penal Code, 1860, S.188--Cognizance of offence--Bar under Section 195 Cr.P.C.--Investigations can be carried out by police on FIR in respect of cognizable offence--Bar under Section 195(1) (c) of code is only against Court taking cognizance of matter except on complaint by Public Servant. (P.17)

       

JudgmentJudgment

Hemant Gupta, J.

1. The petitioner has invoked the jurisdiction of this Court for quashing of FIR No. 107 dated 9.9.2007 under section 188 of the Indian Penal Code, Police Station Lehra under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 1973 (for short "the Code") and by claiming a writ of Certiorari under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

2. The petitioner alleges himself to be a social worker and General Secretary of "Volunteers for Social Justice", which is a Non Governmental Organization. The petitioner alleges himself to be Chairperson of the Dalit Dasta Virodhi Andolan, a programme run by the organization. The petitioner alleges that 88 Padyatri were arrested by the police belonging to down trodden class of the society and by violating the fundamental rights of such persons. It is pleaded that a "Awareness Pad Yatra" was started in the entire State of Punjab. The intimation of the said Pad Yatra was given to the Deputy Commissioners, Senior Superintendents of Police and all concerned Station House Officers and Sub Divisional Magistrates. The compaign was started on 14.08.2007 from District Fatehgarh Sahib. On 2.9.2007, Padyatries entered the jurisdiction of District Sangrur but on 8.9.2007 when Padyatries reached near village Jalour,Tehsil Moonak. District Sangrur, more than 100 unlawful persons armed with lathis and weapons did not allow the Padyatries to enter village Jalour. The police personnel accompanying Padyatries did not take any action against such persons but moved the Padyatries to a distance of 10 Kms from village Jalour and detained them in Police Chowki Kauria. The next day the petitioners were informed that they have been booked for the offences under sections 107/151 of the Code and 188 ofthe Indian Penal Code. All the Padya- tries were taken to Police Station Lehra on 9.9.2007 and arrested for the offences under sections 107/151 ofthe Code and 188 ofthe Indian Penal Code. DDR No. 21 dated 9.9.2007 for the offences under sections 107/151 ofthe Code and FIR No. 107 dated 9.9.2007 under section 188 of the Indian Penal Code was registered against 88 persons including the petitioner on the basis of statement of Surjit Singh, Sub Inspector. The petitioner and the Padyatries were later on informed by the Station House Officer that a proclamation under section 144 of the Code has been issued by the District Magistrate, Sangrur, and said proclamation has been violated by them. It is alleged by the petitioner that the proclamation under section 144 of the Code was not shown to the petitioner and that proceedings initiated by the Station House Officer, Police Station Lehra, are in violation of Article 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner further alleges that they have travelled more than 200 Kms in District Sangrur with police protection but none has informed about proclamation under section 144 of the Code. The notification dated 3.8.2007 in respect of proclamation under section 144 of the Code was presented along with police reports before the Court of Shri Gurnam Singh, Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Moonak. It is pleaded that the petitioner has been discharged under sections 107/151 of the Code on 17.09.2007.

3. The petitioner and other Padyatries have moved an application for discharge before the learned Trial Magistrate. The same was dismissed on 8.7.2008. It was found that the complaint has been filed by a public servant i.e. Shri V.K. Ohri, District Magistrate, Sangrur, on 23.11.2007 and that the present case is being dealt with as a complaint case. The District Magistrate, Sangrur, has filed complaint before the learned trial Magistrate along with the report of the police under section 173 of the Code. Therefore, the accused cannot be discharged. The challenge in the present writ petition is, inter alia, to FIR No. 107 dated 9.9.2007 and the order dated 8.7.2008 passed by the learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Moonak, Annexure P-14.

4. The grievanc





























Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top