Criminal Misc. No. M-32940 of 2008 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc.No.M-32940 of 2008 Date of decision : 23.11.2011. Manjinder Kaur ................ Petitioner vs. Union Territory, Chandigarh ................. Respondent CORAM :- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.C.PURI. 1. Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present: Shri Onkar Rai, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri D.D.Sharma, Advocate for UT Chandigarh. K.C. PURI, J. Challenge in the present petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short – Cr.P.C.) is the complaint dated 23.5.2008 Criminal Misc. No. M-32940 of 2008 2 (Annexure P-3) vide which proceedings under Section 182 of the Indian Penal Code ( in short – IPC) were initiated against the petitioner by Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Union Territory, Chandigarh. 2. Briefly stated petitioner-Manjinder Kaur filed complaint to Senior Superintendent of Police, Operation Police Headquarter, Union Territory Chandigarh against Harminder Singh Sub Inspector, Police Station Sector 34, Chandigarh son of Gurdial Singh and Satwinder Kaur wife of Harminder Singh. It is alleged by the petitioner that Harminder Singh and Satwinder Kaur are her brother-in-law and sister-in-law respectively. The above named persons were harassing her from the date of her marriage and have been insisting on dowry and ill-treating her and took all her dowry articles. She has been threatened by her brother-in-law Harminder Singh SI in Chandigarh Police at many instances and she has been approaching the authorities in respect of the same. But, Harminder Singh has managed to influence his senior officers and no action has been taken against him so far. On 3.5.2007, she received a telephonic call from her sister-in-law Satvinder Kaur that they wanted to amicably bring an end to the matrimonial dispute and fixed a meeting at the house of her father's brother Shri Avtar Singh in Sector 29, Chandigarh. She reached there along with her father and after some time her mother in law Harbhajan Kaur and sister in law Satvinder Kaur came there and started pressuring her and her father that the settlement can only be done if I take all her cases back and her father pays a sum of Rs.5lakhs to settle the dispute and take her and her small daughter back to his matrimonial home and also imposed the condition that she would not interfere in good or bad of her husband and he Criminal Misc. No. M-32940 of 2008 3 would keep on taking drugs as per his choice to lead his life. The matter remained unresolved and no solution came out and his father became seriously ill with tension and stress and was required to be hospitalized on that date. 3. She called up her brother in-law Harminder Singh to tell him of the incident that her father has become serious due to harassment but he refused to listen to her. On 24.5.2007, she came to the District Court Sector 17, Chandigarh to meet her Advocate. While going walking towards the bus stand she met her brother-in-law Harminder Singh, who saw her and started abusing her in foil language and told her that last time her father has become seriously ill this time he would ensure that he is not saved. He told her that he has managed all the complaints and cases against him filed by her and told her that he cannot stand against his power and that now he would teach her and her family a lesson. He threatened her that he would implicate her brother in a false drugs cases and he would not get bail for years. Harminder Singh left after threatening her with dire consequences if she would not withdraw all the cases she have instituted against her in-laws. She was so frightened that she could not move from the spot and called upon her brother with whom she came to the Women Cell and met the lady officer standing outside the reception who told her to make complainant through the SSP office as no direct complaint is entertained there. The said matter was investigated and the complaint was found to be false. The Station House Officer, Police Station Sector 17, Union Territory Chandigarh filed complaint under Section 195 Cr.P.C. against the petitioner in respect of offence under Section 182 IPC. Criminal Misc. No. M-32940 of 2008 4 4. The main contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that since the application was addressed to Senior Superintendent of Police, Police Operation and as such in view of Section 195 Cr.P.C., the proceedings can be initiated at the instance of Senior Superintendent of Police, operation or the other officer superior to him. To fortify his argument learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon following authorities :- 1. Kulwinder Singh vs. State of Punjab and another 2008(4) R.C.R. (Criminal) 418 ; 2. Randhir vs. State of Haryana and others 2004 Crl.J.J. 479 ; 3. Tarlochan Singh vs. State of Punjab 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 791 ; 4. State of Punjab vs. Brij Lal Palta AIR 1969 Supreme Court 355. 5. Learned counsel for the Union Territory was fair enough to concede the said legal position. The present complaint has been filed by the Station House Officer, although the contents of which were found to be false was addressed to Senior Superintendent of Police, Operation, Union Territory, Chandigarh. 6. So, in view of the authorities mentioned above, the initiation of proceedings under Section 182 IPC without filing complaint by Senior Superintendent of Police cannot be allowed to be continued in view of the provisions of Section 195 Cr.P.C. 7. Consequently, the complaint dated 24.5.2007 stands quashed. However, it is made clear that prosecution is well within its rights to initiate proceedings by a competent officer, if so advised. Criminal Misc. No. M-32940 of 2008 5 8. A copy of this judgment be sent to the trial Court for strict compliance. ( K.C.PURI ) JUDGE November 23, 2011 sv