JUDGMENT :

Anoop Chitkara, J. -

1. Seeking quashing of FIR captioned above and also for issuance of guidelines that offence under Punjab Excise Act 1914 be not aggravated by taking resort to provisions of IPC or BNS and also to quash Look Out Circular, if any, the petitioners had come up before this Court by filing the present petition under Section 482CrPC r/w 528 & 529 of BNS S 2023.

2. To ascertain that whether the case is worth issuing notice or not, I have heard Senior Advocate Mr. Vikram Chaudhary and gone through the petition and its analysis would lead to the following outcome.

3. Petitioner No.l is a company and petitioners No.2 & 3 were associated with the same. Petitioners' case is that M/s N.V. International Pvt. Ltd. is one of the larger distilleries of grain alcohol and manufacturing it for last 24 years and has paid more than 100 crores Rupees of tax to Government of Haryana. Petitioner No.2 is aged 73 years, is an entrepreneur, but for last 12 years is grappling with severe depression and diagnosed with Bipolar disorder and has lately been suffering from a Post Psychotic Depression.

4. Petitioner No.3 is a law graduate with commerce background and has also qualified Chartered Accountant and is rendering professional services to the company.

5. Petitioner's counsel argued that company is a holder of D-2 License for manufacturing the following:-

6. The above captioned FIR which is sought to be quashed is annexed as Annexure P-3 and it would be relevant to extract the relevant portion, which reads as follows:-

7. Perusal of the petition does not refer to any police report filed under Section 193 BNSS or 173 CrPC and there is nothing to demonstrate that investigation in this case is complete.

8. Mr. Vikram Chaudhary, Sr. Advocate submits that primary illegality is that Punjab Excise Act 1914 extended to Haryana is a complete code and takes care of the offence as such it was absolutely illegal to invoke provisions of Indian Penal Code Sections i.e. 120B, 406, 420, 467, 468, 471, 473 IPC. He further submits that petitioner has been seriously prejudiced for the reason that maximum sentence under Punjab Excise Act is just three years, whereas maximum sentence prescribed under the Indian Penal Code offences under 467 IPC can extend to life, thus it will seriously prejudice the petitioners. This argument has to be seen in the light of allegations made in the FIR (Annexure P-3). Perusal of the FIR (supra) clearly mentions about duplicate and counterfeit bar codes and holograms. It means there was forgery of valuable security because alcohol is state privilege which is sold only after grant of licenses and bar codes and holograms ensure that revenue has been paid.

9. Although there might be some dispute about application of Section 406 IPC but on the face of it prima facie offence under 420, 467, 468, 471 & 473 IPC is clearly inferable from the recovery of alcohol with counterfeit holograms and bar codes. Thus, on this ground alone, provisions under IPC cannot be quashed.

10. Since the petitioners' prayer is for quashing of entire FIR, a perusal of the provisions of Excise Act would prima facie point towards the contravention of possession, as such the criminal proceedings cannot be disrupted at such a initial stage and no ground exist for quashing the same.

11. Third argument is for quashing of LOC issued against the petitioner. Perusal of the petition does not refer to any specific pleadings regarding Look Out Circulars, as such in the absence of pleadings, this Court cannot adjudicate this matter and consequently the liberty reserved to the petitioner to challenge Look Out Circulars in appropriate Courts, if not already challenged in other jurisdictions.

12. Mr. Vikram Chaudhry, Sr. Advocate has