2023 Supreme(P&H) 815
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Pankaj Jain, J.
Gurbachan Singh and Others - Petitioners - Appellant
Versus
State of Punjab and Another - Respondents - Respondent
CRM-M-38264 of 2019 (O&M)
Decided On : 27-07-2023
Mr. K.S. Kahlon, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr. Tarun Aggarwal, Sr. DAG, Punjab.
Mr. Sidharth Gupta, Legal Aid Counsel for respondent No.2.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the mandatory procedure to be followed by the trial Court as prescribed under Section 210 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, in cases involving a complaint and police investigation in respect of the same offence.
Headnote:
Criminal Complaint - Quashing of Criminal Complaint - Sections 326, 324, 323, 148 and 149 of IPC - [Sections 201, 210 of Cr.P.C.] - The court discussed the provisions of Sections 201 and 210 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, which govern the procedure to be followed when there is a complaint case and police investigation in respect of the same offence. The court highlighted that the trial Court failed to follow the mandatory procedure as prescribed under Section 210 Cr.P.C., leading to the impugned order summoning the petitioners being set aside.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought quashing of a criminal complaint and summoning order under Sections 326, 324, 323, 148 and 149 of IPC, stating that the trial Court overlooked the provisions contained in Sections 201 IPC despite the existence of a criminal case.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the trial Court failed to follow the mandatory procedure as prescribed under Section 210 Cr.P.C., leading to the impugned order summoning the petitioners being set aside.
Issues: The main issue was the failure of the trial Court to follow the mandatory procedure as prescribed under Section 210 Cr.P.C. in summoning the petitioners.
Ratio Decidendi: The ratio decidendi was that the trial Court's failure to follow the mandatory procedure as prescribed under Section 210 Cr.P.C. rendered the impugned order summoning the petitioners unsustainable.
Final Decision: The impugned order summoning the petitioners was set aside, and the trial Court was directed to proceed in accordance with law.
PANKAJ JAIN. J. ORAL
1. Prayer is for quashing of criminal complaint titled as Kuldip Singh Vs. Gurbachan Singh and others bearing criminal case No.33 of 21.02.2015 under Sections 326, 324, 323, 148 and 149 of IPC, Police Station Fatehgarh Churian (Annexure P-1) stated to be pending before JMIC, Batala, and summoning order dated 13.05.2019 passed by the trial Court, summoning the petitioners to face trial under Sections 326, 324, 148 and 149 IPC (Annexure P-4) and quash the impugned order dated 30.09.2015 (Annexure P-7).
2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that qua the same, FIR No.58 dated 20.07.2014 was got registered at Police Station Fatehgarh Churian and while investigation was pending, present complaint bearing No.33 of 21.02.2015 (Annexure P-1) was filed by the complainant, wherein, the petitioners have been summoned vide impugned order dated 13.05.2019 (Annexure P-4). Counsel further submits that the same has been passed by the trial Court, oblivious of the provisions contained in Sections 201 IPC, despite there being a criminal case. He submits that the trial court ought to have called for the investigation report from the investigating agency more so when the factum of FIR having been registered was mentioned in the complaint itself.
3. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 does not dispute that on the day the summoning order was passed, FIR No.58 dated 20.07.2014 was pending. He, however, submits that the complainant later suffered a statement before the Investigating agency that he does not want to pursue a private complaint, in view of the fact that the accused stood summoned in the complaint case.
4. I have heard learned Counsel for the parties and have carefully gone through the records of the case.
5. In order to appreciate the controversy involved, the complaint filed by the respondent before the trial Court needs to be perused, which reads as under:-
“1. That complainant is the resident of Village Teja Kalan, P.S. Fatehgarh Churian Tehsil Batala District Gurdaspur and is agriculturist by profession.
2. That, there is a complaint case which is pending between the complainant and accused Gurbachan Singh and others in the court of Shri Harpreet Singh J.M.I.C. Batala which was fixed for 19.07.2014 and in that case accused Gurbachan Singh and his son accused Davinder Pal Singh and his wife accused Sawinder Kaur appeared as a witnesses and some unidentified persons and relatives were with them and outside the court a quarrel was occurred between the complainant and accused persons and after that complainant and his mother Tarleep Kaur were coming towards village Teja Kalan via Aliwal on a motor cycle. When they reached to Lorry weighreigh (Dharamkanda) near Pannu Palace Kala Afgana at about 6.30 p.m. they stopped at their Lorry weighreigh (Dharamkanda) to lookafter the same. At that time two cars one Zen Car and other Indica car color white came there and accused Gurbachan Singh, accused Sawinder Kaur his wife and their son accused Davinderpal Singh were sitting in Indica Car and accused Sawinder Kaur raised Lalkara to catch him and in the meantime accused Davinder Pal Singh who was driving the car stopped the car and after taking the Kirpan from car hit a kirpan blow to the complainant which hit on the right side of his head, and unidentified persons started quarrel with the complainant, in the mean time accused Gurbachan Singh gave 2/3 kirtch blows to the complainant which hit on the back of his neck, on his back and back side of the upper part of his left arm, then accused Davinder Pal Singh hit his kirpan blow to the complainant on which complainant forward his right arm for his rescue which hit on the outside of his right arm, then accused Gurbachan Singh gave his kirtch blow to the complainant which hit on his right side of the stomach and complainant and his mother loudly alarm Raula Maar Ditta Maar Ditta and in the mean time accused Davinderpal Singh gave his kirpan blow to the complainant which hit on the ankle o