The need for notice to be issued to the first informant and the limited role of legal heirs in opposing the cancellation report.

JUDGMENT

Jasjit Singh Bedi, J. (Oral). - The prayer in the present petition is for quashing of FIR No.241 dated 30.10.2009 under Sections 447, 511, 427, 506 and 34 IPC with Police Station Patran, District Patiala (Annexure P-1).

2. The learned counsel for the petitioners states that a civil dispute was pending between the parties which has culminated in favour of the petitioners upto the High Court. During this period, Balwant Singh, the complainant got registered the aforementioned FIR, which on investigation, was found to be false, and therefore, a cancellation report was submitted to the Court below. The categoric finding of the investigating agency was that Nirbhai Singh was the owner of the land and he had cultivated the same.

3. Notice was issued to Balwant Singh and on his opposing the same, the matter went back for further investigation vide order dated 06.03.2010. During the pendency of the further investigation, the said Balwant Singh passed away and now the cancellation report has been submitted once again on 13.10.2018 after this, the Court had directed that the same should be submitted to the Court within a month of the order dated 21.10.2013 (Annexure P-7). The legal heirs of the said Balwant Singh are not appearing before the Court below despite warrants being issued to them. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that no notice was required to be given to the legal heirs since they are not the first informants. He relies upon Paras 4 and 5 of the judgment passed by the Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Bhagwant Singh versus Commissioner of Police, 1985 (2) RCR (Criminal) 259 to support his argument. Paras 4 and 5 of the said judgment are reproduced as under:-

4. Now, when the report forwarded by the officer-in charge of a police station to the Magistrate under sub-section (2)(i) of Section 173 comes up for consideration by the Magistrate, one of two different situations may arise. The report may conclude that an offence appears to have been committed by a particular person or persons and in such a case, the Magistrate may do one of three things: (1) he may accept the report and take cognizance of the offence and issue process or (2) he may disagree with the report and drop the proceeding or (3) he may direct further investigation under sub-section (3) of Section 156 and require the police to make a further report. The report may on the other hand state that, in the opinion of the police, no offence appears to have been committed and where such a report has been made, the Magistrate again has an option to adopt one of three courses: (1) he may accept the report and drop the proceeding or (2) he may disagree with the report and taking the view that there is sufficient ground for proceeding further, take cognizance of the offence and issue process or (3) he may direct further investigation to be made by the police under sub-section (3) of Section 156. Where, in either of these two situations, the Magistrate decides to take cognizance of the offence and to issue process, the informant is not prejudicially affected nor is the injured or in case of death, any relative of the deceased aggrieved, because cognizance of the offence is taken by the Magistrate and it is decided by the Magistrate that the case shall proceed. But if the Magistrate decides that there is no sufficient ground for proceeding further and drops the proceeding or takes the view that though there is sufficient ground for proceeding against some, there is no sufficient ground for proceeding against others mentioned in the First Information Report, the informant would certainly be prejudiced because the First Information Report lodged by him would have failed of its purpose, wholly or in part. Moreover, when the interest of the informant in prompt and effective action being taken on the First Information Report lodged by him is clearly recognised by the provisions contained in sub-section (2) of Section 154, sub- section (2) of Section 157