Crl.Misc. No. M-7539 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-7539 of 2010 Date of Decision:March 17 , 2010 Raman Kumar and another ...........Petitioners Versus State of Punjab ..........Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Sabina Present: Mr. Tribhuwan Singla,Advocate for the petitioners. ** Sabina, J. Petitioners have filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short `Cr.P.C.) seeking quashing of FIR No.143 dated 23.8.2003 registered under Sections 379/411/420/467/468/471/120-B of the Indian Penal Code (for short `IPC') at Police Station Sadar, Mansa,District Mansa and subsequent proceedings framing charge dated 1.3.2008 (Annexure P6) (Colly) and order dated 18.9.2009 (Annexure P8) passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Mansa, whereby the revision petition filed by the petitioners against the framing of charge was dismissed. The contents of the FIR, as reproduced in para 1 of the petition, are as under:- Crl.Misc. No. M-7539 of 2010 2 "That the brief facts of the case are that on 23.8.2003, I Inspector Lachhman Singh, Sub Inpector Sanjiv Goel, ASI Jagdish Kumar, HC, Sanjit Singh, 585, HC Amarjit Singh 322, HC Harnek Singh 134 HC Darshan Singh 268, C Gurmel Singh 404 were patrolling in search of suspicious persons in our government vehicle Jeep Tamp Trax PB31-8265 driven by Driver C.Gurjit Singh and were present at Thuthian Kenchian. Then a special informer came and informed me that Gurjant Singh son of Jagar Singh, Rangeela Street, Mansa now Delhi, Jagsir Singh alias Billu son of Sukhdev Singh, Goldsmith, resident of Ward No.9, Dhirwali Street Mansa, Vijay son of Kewal Krishan, resident of Ward No.9, Dhirwali Street Mansa have made a gang and this gang has also concerned with Balwinder Singh alias Kaka, Ex.MC, Mansa. This gang, by presenting person, took loan from the banks and financed the new cars from different agencies and after insuring these cars, they shown it to be stolen and prepared the forged Will of these cars and bring it to the Mansa and other districts of Punjab and sold it to the General public by lowering their price with the intention to commit cheating and fraud with the people. Besides that new cars, they also sold the old cars from Delhi and by preparing false documents, they sold these to the innocent peoples on lesser price with intention to commit cheating, they have now sold one Santro Car to Raghbir Singh, resident of Goniana Mandi, Kuldip Singh, resident of Jeon wala, District Faridkot, One Maruti Car Kala son of Hamir Chand, resident of Malkian, One Indica Car Jagmohan Singh, resident of Mansa, One Indica Car Sagar Sharma, resident Crl.Misc. No. M-7539 of 2010 3 of Mansa, one zen Car Parshottam Car, Samao Road, Bhikhi,One Indica Car Makhan Kumar, resident of Mansa by keeping them in dark with intention to cheat them. If this gang be caught then some other cars can also be recovered from them. Today, the person of this gang will take the car from Bhikhi to Bathinda. If the nakabandi is done then one car City Honda can be recovered. The information is reliable. The offence against the aforesaid gang for stealing old and new cars by making forged documents and by taking into confidence innocent people, committed the offence u/ss 379/420/467/468/471/120-B IPC” Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners were innocent and had been falsely involved in this case. No prior sanction under Section 197 Cr.P.C. had been obtained by the prosecution and hence, the FIR qua the petitioners was liable to be quashed. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioners, I am of the opinion that the instant petition deserves to be dismissed. The allegations against the petitioners are that they had been preparing forged registration certificates in connivance with the other co- accused. In these circumstances, the learned trial Court had rightly framed charge against the petitioners as a prima facie case was made out against the petitioners. Aggrieved by the order of framing of the charge by the trial Court, petitioners preferred the revision petition, which was dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge vide order dated 18.9.2009. This Court in para 6 of its judgment in Manoj vs. Prem Lal, 2006(3) RCR(Criminal) 941, held as under:- "Power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has to be exercised sparingly Crl.Misc. No. M-7539 of 2010 4 and such power was not to be utilised as a substitute for second revision. Ordinarily, when a revision has been barred under Section 397(3) of the Code, the complainant or the accused cannot be allowed to take recourse to revision before the High Court under Section 397(1) of the Code, as it is prohibited under Section 397(3) Cr.P.C. However, the High Court can entertain a petition under Section 482 of the Code, when there is serious miscarriage of justice and abuse of the process of the Court or when mandatory provision of law are not complied with and when the High court feels that the inherent jurisdiction is to be exercised to correct the mistake committed by the revisional Court." In the present case, learned counsel for the petitioners has failed to point out any miscarriage of justice or the abuse of process of Court which would warrant interference by this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The reasons given by the Additional Sessions Judge, while dismissing the revision petition filed by the petitioners, are sound reasons and call for no interference. Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed. (Sabina) Judge March 17, 2010 arya Crl.Misc. No. M-7539 of 2010 5