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

2019 Supreme(P&H) 1429

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Arvind Singh Sangwan, J.
Hanumant Singh Raghav - Petitioner
Versus
Rajinder Kumar - Respondent
CRM-M-14981-2017 (O&M)
Decided On : 14-11-2019

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Keshav Pratap Singh, Adv.
For the Respondent: Mr. B.D. Sharma, Adv.

The lack of specific allegations and the improper procedure rendered the prosecution of the petitioner unsustainable.

Headnote:

False Verification - Criminal Complaint - Indian Penal Code (IPC) Sections 167, 209, 219, 420, 467, 468, 471 - The court discussed the false verification of a driving license, the role of the accused in obtaining a false report, and the connivance of individuals to obtain a false decree against the complainant. The court highlighted the lack of specific allegations against the petitioner and the improper procedure followed by the trial court in issuing the summoning order.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner sought to quash a criminal complaint and summoning order related to false verification of a driving license. The complainant filed the complaint against several individuals, including the petitioner, without specific allegations against the petitioner.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the petitioner, as an advocate, had no direct role in the false verification and that the prosecution of the petitioner was not sustainable. The court also noted the lack of specific allegations and the improper procedure followed by the trial court.

Issues: The issues involved the false verification of a driving license, the role of the accused, and the propriety of the summoning order against the petitioner.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the lack of specific allegations and the improper procedure rendered the prosecution of the petitioner unsustainable.

Final Decision: The petition to quash the criminal complaint and summoning order was allowed, and both were quashed.

JUDGMENT :

Arvind Singh Sangwan, J.

Prayer in this petition is for quashing of the criminal complaint No.COMI/127/2014 dated 09.11.2012 titled as Rajinder Vs. Regional Manager, ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company and others (Annexure P-9) and the summoning order dated 13.06.2016 (Annexure P-10), vide which the petitioner had been summoned to face the trial under Sections 167, 209, 219, 420, 467, 468, 471 of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC').

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the relevant facts for just decision of the case are that one Jagga Singh met with an accident on 14.08.2007 with the car of respondent-complainant Rajinder Kumar and on that account, FIR No.34 dated 19.09.2007 was registered. Later on, Jagga Singh filed a claim petition before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sirsa (for short 'MACT'), in which ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company was arrayed as respondent No.2 and owner of the car/respondent-complainant Rajinder Kumar was arrayed as respondent No.1. The said MACT case No.75/2007 was decided ex-parte against respondent-complainant, as despite repeated service through ordinary process and registered post, he could not be served and ultimately, on receiving the report that he is avoiding the service, the complainant was proceeded against ex-parte on 31.08.2008 by the MACT, Sirsa. Thereafter, the case was referred to the Lok Adalat, where a settlement was arrived at between Jagga Singh and Insurance Company and in pursuance to the settlement, award dated 22.11.2008 was passed. The operative part of the award reads as under:-

    “In view of the settlement arrived at before the Lok Adalat, I hereby award a compensation of Rs.1,15,000/- in favour of the petitioner, which shall be deposited by respondent no.2 within two months from today, failing which the claimant will be entitled to realize the same with interest @7-1/2% per annum from the date of award till realization and the payment subject to realization of D/L. It is directed that the amount on realization shall be disbursed to the petitioner in cash against proper receipt and identification. Parties are left to bear their own costs. Memo of costs be prepared and file be consigned to record room.”

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that later on, an application was moved for correction, which was also allowed. As per the award, ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company was to pay an amount of Rs.1.15 lac to claimant Jagga Singh. Thereafter, the Insurance Company got verification of the driving licence of respondent-complainant Rajinder Kumar, in which the Licensing Authority, Sri Muktsar Sahib gave information to ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company on 24.11.2008 that the licence in the name of complainant was valid upto 05.01.2001.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that when the execution was filed on 09.01.2010, the executing Court passed an order that the Insurance Company/JD No.2 will pay the amount to claimant Jagga Singh with a right to recover the same from Rajinder Kumar-respondent-JD No.1. It is further submitted that thereafter, the amount was paid by the Insurance Company and on coming to know about the proceedings, the respondent-complainant filed the impugned criminal complaint against six persons, in which Regional Manager, ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company was arrayed as accused No.1, Area Manager, ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company, Sirsa was arrayed as accused No.2, Santosh Rani was arrayed as accused No.3, ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company, Ludhiana was arrayed as accused No.4, Jagga Singh was arrayed as accused No.5 and Neeraj Kumar, Clerk, Office of DTO, Sri Muktsar Sahib was arrayed as accused No.6 and in this complaint, the petitioner was never arrayed as an accused and there was a passing reference in its para No.2 that the petitioner, being Advocate, who was representing Jagga Singh, had applied for transfer of decree to MACT, Sri Muktsar Sahib an

      Click Here to Read the rest of this document
      1
      2
      3
      4
      5
      6
      7
      8
      9
      10
      11
      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