Crl. Misc. No. M-721 of 2010 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl. Misc. No. M-721 of 2010 Date of Decision: October 29, 2010 Joga Singh …..Petitioner Vs. State of Punjab and others …..Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.S. BEDI. -.- Present:- Mr. M.K. Singla, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. P.S. Bajwa, DAG, Punjab. Mr.Parijat Gaur, Advocate for the complainant. -.- M.M.S. BEDI, J. Through instant petition the petitioner seeks quashing of Calendra under Section 182 IPC dated June 28, 2009 filed by S.H.O., Police Station, Fatehgarh Sahib in the Court of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Fatehgarh Sahib on September 5, 2009. Petitioner claims that he is serving in the office of Divisional Commissioner, Patiala Division, Patiala. He Crl. Misc. No. M-721 of 2010 [2] submitted an application to Divisional Commissioner as well as to DIG, Patiala Range to the effect that respondent No.5- Randhir Singh used to quarrel with him, threatened him and stopped him from making construction in his own land and also gave threats that they will create hurdle in the marriage of their niece. The said application was referred by respondent No.2 S.S.P, Fatehgarh Sahib to DSP, Fatehgarh Sahib- respondent No.3 for making enquiry and respondent No.3 found the application to be false. Thereafter respondent No.5 submitted an application to respondent No.3 for taking action against the petitioner under Section 182 IPC. Respondent No.4, SHO, Police Station, Fatehgarh Sahib, prepared a Calendra under Section 182 IPC dated June 28, 2009 and presented the same in the Court of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Fatehgarh Sahib on September 5, 2009. Counsel for the petitioner has contended that a perusal of Section 195 Cr.P.C. makes it amply clear that a complaint under Section 182 IPC can be initiated against the informant only by the officer, to whom the false information has been made and not by any supporting officer. In the present case, the petitioner had submitted an application to S.S.P., Fatehgarh Sahib for taking action against respondent No.5 whereas the calendar annexure P-1 has been filed by respondent No.4. In support of the contention, reliance has been placed on Daulat Ram Vs. State of Punjab, AIR 1962 SC 1206, D.S. Rawat Vs. State of Punjab, 2007 (2) RCR (Crl.) 199 and Kulwinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab and another, 2008 (4) RCR (Crl.) 418. A joint reading of Crl. Misc. No. M-721 of 2010 [3] Section 195 Cr.P.C. and Section 182 IPC show that a complaint under Section 182 IPC can be initiated against the informant only by the officer to whom the false information has been made and not by any other authority to whom he is administratively supporting. Applying the ratio of the abovesaid judgments and perusal of Calendra, annexure P-1, there is no dispute regarding the proposition but perusal of annexure P-1, copy of the compliant under Section 195 Cr.P.C. indicates that the compliant has been submitted to SSP, Fatehgarh Sahib and is signed by SSP alongwith a prayer that he being a Government employee his personal appearance be exempted as the matter will be pursued by Government Pleader on his behalf. I have seen the photocopy of the complaint dated August 4, 2009. It bears the signatures of SSP. The plea that it has not been submitted by the competent person is thus baseless. Petition is dismissed. However, dismissal of this petition will not prejudice the rights of the petitioner to seek acquittal on merits by appearing before the trial Court, in accordance with law. October 29, 2010 (M.M.S.BEDI) sanjay JUDGE