IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH -.- Crl.Misc.No. M-14394 of 2008 Date of Decision:- 17.2.2009 Narinder Singh & Anr Versus State of Punjab & Anr. Present:- Mr. G.S.Toor, Advocate, for the petitioners. Ms. Rajni Gupta, DAG, Punjab. M.M.S.BEDI. (J) (Oral) Petitioners seek quashing of FIR No. 50 dated 1.3.2008, under Sections 420, 448, 467, 468, 471, 380, 506 and 120-B IPC, registerd at Police Station City Barnala, District Barnala, registered at the instance respondent No.2-Waryam Singh. As per the allegations in the FIR, the petitioners have fabricated rent receipt of a shop belonging to the complainant dated 5.2.2007. Learned counsel for the petitioners had contended that the receipt dated 5.2.2007 is already a subject matter of the civil suit filed by petitioner No.1 against Tarlok Singh son of Waryam Singh. It has been contended that petitioner No.1 has filed a suit for permanent injunction on the basis of rent receipt dated 5.2.2007 as he has taken a shop on rent @ 12,000/- per annum. In order to protect his possession he filed a suit for permanent injunction on 26.7.2007 and order of status quo was passed in his favour. The said order has been affirmed in appeal. So far as present FIR is concerned it was registered on 1.3.2008 though the suit had been filed by the petitioner on 26.7.2007 much prior to the lodging of FIR. Whether the petitioner has fabricated the rent receipt is to be decided in the civil case also. Crl.Misc.No. M-14394 of 2008 -2- I have gone through the police file. There is not report, prima facie inficating that the receipt produced by the petitioner No.1 before the Civil Court is a fabricated document. Besides this, it appears that the allegation against the petitioners is that they had produced a fabricated receipt before the Civil Court to claim injunction. If the receipt is proved to be a fabricated document then it could constitute an offence under Section 193 IPC. The petitioners will also be liable for giving false evidence as per provisions of Section 191 IPC. It could not be ignored that prosecution for offences under Sections 193 to 196 IPC fall under the ambit of Section 195 (1)(b)(i) Criminal Procedure Code which prohibits the taking of cognizance except on a complaint in writing by the Court before which fabricated documents or false evidence is produced. It is a case where document alleged to be forged is also produced in the Court as provisions of Section 195(1)(b)(i) Cr.P.C will be applicable. In view of the said circumstances, further proceedings in the FIR and criminal proceedings against the petitioners are set aside. However, in case receipt dated 5.2.2007 is found to be fordged and fabricated, it will be open to the Court concern to initiate action against the petitioners. Petition is allowed. Above said FIR and all the criminal proceedings emanating therefrom are hereby qaushed. February 17, 2009 (M.M.S.Bedi) tripti Judge