The central legal point established in the judgment is that the Trial Court lacked jurisdiction to take cognizance of certain offences without a written complaint to the Court, as per the judgment in the case of Ram Kumar v. State of Haryana.

Augustine George Masih, J. (Oral) - The present petition has been filed by the petitioner, praying for quashing of F.I.R. No. 71, dated 11.06.2002, under Sections 452, 427, 353, 186, 504, 506 Indian Penal Code, registered at Police Station Bassi Pathana, District Fatehgarh Sahib, and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom.

2. Counsel for the petitioner contends that in the light of judgment passed by this Court in the case of Ram Kumar v. State of Haryana, 1998 (1) C.L.R. 633, the offence under Sections 186 and 353 Indian Penal Code could not have taken cognizance upon a written complaint of public servant concerned or official superior in the light of provisions under Section 195(1) Criminal Procedure Code In this view of the matter, he submits that the F.I.R. in question deserves to be quashed. He further submits that in any case there has been a compromise, which has been entered into between the parties and in view of the said compromise, the F.I.R. may be quashed.

3. An affidavit on behalf of the complainant-respondent No. 2 Jarnail Singh son of Shri Darshan Singh resident of village Mathi, Tehsil and District Fatehgarh Sahib, has been filed in the Court, wherein the factum of compromise has been admitted to be correct. It has further stated that he has no objection in case the F.I.R. in question be quashed alongwith all consequential proceedings arising therefrom.

4. The complainant-respondent No. 2 Jarnail Singh son of Shri Darshan Singh, resident of Village Mathi, Tehsil and District Fatehgarh Sahib, is present in the Court (as identified by his counsel) and states that he does not want to pursue the matter any further. In view of the above submissions made by counsel for the petitioner, it would be in the interest of justice that the F.I.R. in question be quashed.

5. I have heard counsel for the parties and have given through the records of the case.

6. I am of the considered view that the F.I.R. in question deserves to be quashed in the light of judgment of this Court in the case of Ram Kumar (supra), wherein it has been held by this Court that the Trial Court was not competent to take cognizance in any of the offence falling under Sections 186 and 353 Indian Penal Code against the petitioner in the absence of such written complaint to the Court. Therefore, even if the trial is allowed to proceed, the petitioner cannot be ultimately convicted as the Trial Court lacks the jurisdiction to take cognizance of the offence and the entire proceedings will be merely an exercise in futility. This is certainly a compelling circumstance, which call for the exercise of the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Criminal Procedure Code and for quashing the proceedings.

7. Keeping the above mentioned judgment in view and also the amicable settlement of the dispute between the complainant-respondent No. 2 and the petitioner, the present petition is allowed. Consequently F.I.R. No. 71, dated 11.06.2002, under Sections 452, 427, 353, 186, 504, 506 Indian Penal Code, registered at Police Station Bassi Pathana, District Fatehgarh Sahib, and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom are quashed.

Petition allowed.