Criminal Misc. M No. 2524 of 2009 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. M No. 2524 of 2009 Date of Decision: March 09, 2009 Harinderjit Singh ...........Petitioner Versus State of Punjab & others ..........Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Sabina Present: Mr. Manu K. Bhandari, Advocate for the petitioner. ** Sabina, J. Petitioner has filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking quashing of order dated 11.9.2008 (Annexure P.18) passed by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Patiala vide which the cancellation report with regard to FIR No.420 dated 8.12.2004 under Sections 406/420/379/380/120-B/506 of the Indian Penal Code (`IPC' for short) registered at Police Station Civil Lines, Patiala has been accepted without issuing notice to the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the cancellation report with regard to FIR in question has been accepted without issuing notice to the petitioner. The complaint filed by the petitioner (Annexure P1) was with regard to different occurrences. A perusal of the order (Annexure P18) reveals that the cancellation report was accepted in the presence of the counsel for the petitioner and also in the presence of the father of the petitioner. In these circumstances, the arguments raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the cancellation report had been accepted without issuing notice to the Criminal Misc. M No. 2524 of 2009 2 petitioner is without any basis. The cancellation report was moved for the second time after further investigation as per the order of the Judicial Magistrate First Class Patiala holding that no occurrence is alleged to have ever taken place. It has been observed by the learned Magistrate that the petitioner has already availed his remedy by way of filing a complaint. Cancellation report was accepted. The other complaint filed by the petitioner which has been mentioned by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class Patiala has not been placed on record. In these circumstances, the impugned order calls for no interference. Accordingly, this petition is dismissed. (Sabina) Judge March 09,2009 arya