Back
2024 Supreme(P&H) 1191
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
NIDHI GUPTA, J.
Gagandeep Singh Aujla - Appellant
Versus
State of Punjab & Ors. – Respondents
CRM-M No. 16924 of 2016
Decided On : 25-10-2024
The right to a speedy trial is a fundamental right under Article 21, and inordinate delay in proceedings can lead to quashing of FIRs.
Headnote:(A) Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 - Sections 3 and 4 - Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 482 - Quashing of FIR - Petition filed for quashing FIR No.155 dated 06.06.2008 due to inordinate delay of 16 years in filing the challan - Court held that the petitioner, being neither the owner nor manager of the premises, cannot be held liable under the Act - The right to a speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution was violated due to the delay in proceedings. (Paras 11, 13, 16, 17)
(B) Limitation - Cognizance of offences - The FIR registered in 2008 is barred by limitation as per Section 468 Cr.P.C. since the offences are punishable with imprisonment not exceeding three years. (Paras 12, 13)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner was accused in an FIR registered under the Immoral Traffic Act for being present at a resort where illegal activities were alleged. The FIR was filed after a raid, but no charges were framed for over 16 years.
Findings of Court:
The court found that the FIR was liable to be quashed due to the violation of the right to a speedy trial and the lack of evidence attributing the offence to the petitioner.
Issues: The main issues were whether the FIR could be quashed due to the delay in proceedings and whether the petitioner could be held liable under the Immoral Traffic Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the right to a speedy trial is a fundamental right, and the delay in filing the challan violated this right, leading to the quashing of the FIR.
Result: Petition allowed; FIR quashed.
JUDGMENT :
(Nidhi Gupta, J.)
Present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C is filed seeking quashing on merits of FIR No.155 dated 06.06.2018 registered under Section 3/4 of immoral Traffic Act Police Station Sadar (now Rama Mandi), Jalandhar; and all other proceedings in furtherance of the registration of FIR; further prayer that directions be issued to the SHO, Police Station Sadar (now Rama Mandi), Jalandhar, to present the challan in the Court in the above-mentioned case within stipulated period.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the FIR in the present case was registered on 06.06.2008 however, although more than 16 years have passed yet challan has not been presented in the Court till date, and charges have not been framed. Learned Counsel relies upon judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in “Madeshwardhari Singh & Another Vs. State of Bihar” Law Finder Doc ID #45656, to submit that in such situation, FIR is liable to be quashed qua the petitioner/accused.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that in any event, at the worst it can only be said that the petitioner was a customer at the raided premises. Admittedly, the petitioner neither owner nor manager of the said premises and therefore, no offence is made out
4. In compliance of the last order dated 12.07.2024, learned State Counsel files status report dated 23.10.2024 filed by way of affidavit of Babandeep Singh, PPS, Assistant Commissioner of the Police (Cantt), Police Commissionerate, Jalandhar, which is taken on record and a copy of the same is supplied to the counsel opposite.
5. Learned state counsel on the instructions Submits that in the present case, upon secret information received, a raid was conducted upon Lilli Resort on GT Road, Jalandhar where the petitioner was found in room No. 235 along with one other girl. It is Submitted that serious allegation have been made against the petitioner, however, it is admitted that challan has not yet filled in the present case.
6. No other argument is made on behalf of the parties.
7. I have heard leaned counsel for the parties and perused the case file in great detail.
8. Brief facts of the case are that present FIR No.155 dated 06.06.2008 u/s 3, 4 of the Immoral Trafficking Act was registered against the petitioner as well as other co-accused wherein it has been alleged that a secret informer told that in Hotel named lilly Resort situated at G.T. Road, Jalandhar, boys and girls have taken room and wrong address have been mentioned. Therefore, the business of brothel is being run in the Hotel i.e. Lilly Resort G.T. Road and if the raid is conducted then boys and girls will be found in room no. 235, 349, and 350. The said rooms have been taken by the boys and girls mentioning wrong addresses, therefore raid should be conducted. On this information, Inspector Sarabjit Rai, the then SHO of P.S Sardar, Jalandhar conducted Raid at Lilly Resort and Room No.235 was searched, and a boy who identified as Gangandeep Singh (present petitioner) and a girl named Sweta was found.
9. In paras 8, 9, and 10 of the above said status reports, it has been stated as follows:-
“8. That during the investigation, the manager of lilli Resort submitted an application to the DIG, Jalandhar Range and on the basis of same, investigation of FIR was transferred to SSP Kapurthala, who further appointed Sh. Shukhwinder Singh, SP(D), Kapurthala as investigation officer in FIR. It is pertinent to mention here that Inspector Sarabjit Rai had Previously made a booking at Lilli Resort for friend’s party on 31-03-2008, but the payment had not been made for the booking done on 20-04-2008 and when the manager of lilli resort sent an employee to collect the payment from Inspector Sarabjit Rai, the Inspector felt insulted, leading to the registration of the above-said FIR. Hence, the Investigation officer found the registration of above-said FIR as wrong.
9. That on the basis of finding of the above-said officer, SHO of Police Station Cantt, Jalan
