Criminal Misc. No. M- 33463 of 2009 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No. M- 33463 of 2009 Date of decision:- 09.2.2011 Sanjay ...Petitioner Versus State of Haryana ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI Present:- Mr. Rakesh Dhiman, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Kshitij Sharma, AAG Haryana for the respondent-State. RITU BAHRI J. This petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is for quashing of FIR No.238 dated 04.6.2007 under Sections 323,324,452 and 506 IPC read with Section 34 IPC, registered at Police Station Jhajjar, District Jhajjar. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it is apparent from Annexure P-2, the statement of Bajrang-complainant that he has disowned the contents of the version given to the police on the basis of which on 04.6.2007 an FIR under Sections 323,324,452,307 and 506 IPC was registered. He turned hostile and on being cross-examine by learned Public Prosecutor for the State, did not butch even one inch from his stand. The petitioner is employed in the Indian Army Force. The FIR was registered against Murari Lal son of Ramu Singh, Sanjay son of Murari Lal and Kanti wife of Murari, residents of Village Lohari. After police investigation Kanti was found innocent. Father of the petitioner was arrested and joined the investigation. Petitioner was declared proclaimed offender. After going through the prosecution evidence, the trial Criminal Misc. No. M- 33463 of 2009 -2- Court did not record the statement of the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. From the statements made by the material witnesses of the prosecution, the Trial Court acquitted the co-accused of the petitioner i.e. his father Murari Lal. Judgment of the trial Court is dated 05.10.2009. Mr. Rakesh Dhiman, counsel for the petitioner argued that on the basis of the evidence led by the prosecution and the statement made by complainant, father of the petitioner Murari Lal has already been acquitted of the charge and no useful purpose will be served by continuing the proceedings against the petitioner in the same case. Counsel for the petitioner relies on Rajinder Singh alias Rajinder Kumar versus State of Haryana and another 2003(1) RCR (Criminal) 123; Raj alias Hukam Chand alias Nanha versus State of Haryana 2002(3) RCR (Criminal) 653; and Amarjit versus State 1996(1) C.L.R. 619. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the case file carefully. After going through the judgments cited by counsel for the petitioner, no useful purpose will be served by continuing the proceedings against the petitioner. Accordingly, petition is allowed and proceedings against the petitioner in FIR No.238 dated 04.6.2007, under Sections 323,324,452 and 506 IPC read with Section 34 IPC, registered at Police Station Jhajjar, District Jhajjar along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, are quashed qua petitioner. The petition is disposed of accordingly. February 09, 2011 ( RITU BAHRI ) Vijay Asija JUDGE