IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Criminal Miscellaneous No. M-18940 of 2010 Date of Decision: September 20, 2011 Lila Dhar & others .....PETITIONER(S) VERSUS State of Haryana .....RESPONDENT(S) . . . CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: - Mr. Akshay Jain, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. Anupam Sharma, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana. . . . AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral) 1. This petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. prays for quashing FIR No.19 dated 10.1.2010 under Sections 294, 120-B IPC, Police Station, City, Sirsa and consequent proceedings. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that basic ingredients of Section 294 IPC are not satisfied, even if prosecution case is taken at its face value. It has been pleaded that there is no eye witness to the alleged incident. There is no person, Crl. Misc. No. M-18940 of 2010 [2] who was sitting in the Restaurant, before whom the offence was committed and therefore, FIR and consequent proceedings are liable to be quashed. 2. Learned counsel for the respondent-State admits that there is no eye witness to any such incident in the Restaurant. All that has been argued on behalf of the respondent-State is that secret information was received in regard to the petitioners sitting in Restaurant and doing obscene acts, whereupon not only FIR has been registered but even challan has been filed. It is however the admitted case of the respondent-State that no person has reported having seen the obscene acts. 3. Provisions of Section 294 IPC read as under:- “[294- Obscene acts and songs- Whoever, to the annoyance of others, (a) does any obscene act in any public place, or (b) sings, recites or utters any obscene songs, ballad or words, in or near any public place, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three months, or with fine, or with both.]” 4. The basic ingredients of provisions of Section 294 IPC require that an accused does any obscene act in public place, sings, recites or utters obscene songs or speaks such words in or near a public place, to the annoyance of others. 5. In the case in hand, admittedly, no person has come-forward to say that such acts have been done which had annoyed any person. In view of the above circumstances, I am of the Crl. Misc. No. M-18940 of 2010 [3] considered opinion that no offence could be said to have been committed under Section 294 IPC. 6. The petition is allowed. FIR No.19 dated 10.1.2010 under Sections 294, 120-B IPC, Police Station, City, Sirsa and consequent proceedings, are hereby quashed. (AJAI LAMBA) September 20, 2011 JUDGE avin 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?