The judgment emphasizes the importance of conducting a preliminary inquiry under Section 340 Cr.P.C. before initiating proceedings and highlights the limitations and scope of Section 197 in protecting public servants from vexatious criminal proceedings.

ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN, J.

1. The present petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short 'Cr.P.C.') seeking quashing of complaint No.55 dated 12.11.2011 (Annexure P1), charge-sheet dated 29.11.2011 (Annexure P2) as well as the summoning order of even date i.e. 29.11.2011 initiated under Section 340 Cr.P.C. in pursuance to the judgment dated 16.04.2011 (Annexure P4).

2. Brief facts of the case are that on the complaint of petitioner No.2 – Jaswinder Singh, FIR No.70 dated 05.03.2011 under Sections 307, 341, 323 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (in short 'IPC') was registered at Police Station Kharar, in which petitioner No.1 – Gurwinder Singh and petitioner No.3 – Harjit Singh were injured witnesses.

3. During pendency of the trial, there was a compromise arrived at between the parties and the petitioners, as a witnesses, did not support the prosecution version due to the compromise. The trial Court, thereafter, vide its judgment dated 16.04.2011 acquitted the accused persons and directed to initiate proceedings under Section 340 Cr.P.C. against the petitioners. In pursuance to this judgment, the impugned complaint No.55 dated 12.11.2011 under Sections 211 and 193 IPC has been filed and charges have been framed vide order dated 29.11.2011. The petitioners have challenged the aforesaid persons vide which the prosecution against the petitioners has been initiated by invoking the provisions of Section 340 Cr.P.C.

4. Vide order dated 17.01.2012, while issuing notice of motion, further proceedings before the trial Court were stayed by this Court by passing the following order:-

“Contends that the FIR No.70 dated 05.03.2011 under Sections 307/341/323/34 IPC was registered at the behest of the present petitioners on account of having received grievous injuries. However, since both the sides were students, the matter was compromised and accordingly, the accused were acquitted. However, while acquitting accused, the Additional Sessions Judge, SAS Nagar, Mohali, vide his order dated 16.04.2011 held that it would be proper to hold an enquiry under Section 340 Cr.P.C. to find out as to if it would be expedient in the interest of justice to prosecute them for launching prosecution against the accused on the false allegations. It is further contended that while filing the said complaint, no such enquiry was held and the complaint was, accordingly, entertained and the petitioners were summoned. Thus, the very complaint is neither maintainable nor should have been filed in view of the fact that the said accused were acquitted on account of the lack of evidence due to compromise having been arrived at between the parties.

Notice of motion for 15.05.2012.

Meanwhile, further proceedings before the trial Court in pursuance to the same shall remain stayed.”

5. Subsequent thereto, this petition is pending for the last 05 years and reply dated 20.11.2012 by way of affidavit of Deputy Superintendent of Police, Kharar, District Mohali has been filed.

6. Counsel for the petitioners has submitted that before instituting the impugned complaint (Annexure P1) no enquiry was conducted under Section 340 Cr.P.C. and the charges have been framed summarily on 29.11.2011 under Sections 211 and 193 IPC. Counsel for the petitioners has relied upon the judgment passed in “B.K. Uppal vs State of Punjab and other connected cases”, 2015(1) RCR (Criminal) 338, wherein this Court while discussing the scope of Section 340 Cr.P.C. has held as under:-

“43. Further the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Rakesh Kumar Mishra v. State of Bihar and others, 2006(1) R.C.R.(Criminal) 456 : AIR 2006 Supreme Court 820(1) has held in paragraph No. 6 as under :-

"6. The protection given under Section 197 is to protect responsible public servants against the institution of possibly vexatious criminal proceedings for offences alleged to have been committed by them while they are acting or purporting to act as public servan