IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.639 of 2008 DR.SURJIT SINGH, son of Late Harnam Singh, Mohalla Abulas Lane, Machhuatoli, PS Kadam Kuan, District Patna – petitioner. Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 4 8.4.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the counsel appearing on behalf of the State. This application has been filed for quashing the order, dated 12.12.2006 passed by the Subdivisional Judicial Magistrate, Patna in Complaint Case No. 2332C/2006 and the order, dated 8.10.2007 passed by FTC III, Patna in Cr. Revision No. 87/2007. The complainant-petitioner is the Honorary General Secretary of Sikh Intellectual Forum Bihar/Jharkhand Bharastachar Nirodh Abhiyan Sangh. He is voter of the Parbandhak Committee, Sri Takht Harimandirji, Patna City, the birth place of 10th Guru of the Sikhs. Admittedly there is dispute between the Parbandhak Committee and the persons claiming to be appointed in the Parbandhak committee which has been a subject matter of several cases filed both in the court below and the High court. In fact the election of the Parbandhak Committee was held at the instance of the High court. Accused no.1 Sardar Iqbal Singh is functus Ex-officio of the Parbandhak Committee and according to the petitioner he was illegally appointed. The allegation against accused no.1 is that he does not bear a good moral character and he has sworn false affidavits and 2 gave wrong information to the passport office and obtained a passport in his favour. With respect to making false representation before the passport office, paragraphs 20 to 24 of the complaint petition are very relevant. At para 24 it has been stated that the petitioner on 1.12.2005 wrote a letter to the Passport Officer, Patna and copies of the letter to the Senior Superintendent Of Police, Patna and the Officer Incharge of Chowk police station, Patna City in which he has stated that accused no. 1 Bhai Iqbal Singh has given totally false information in his passport papers. The letter sent to the Passport Officer is Annexure 9 to the complaint petition. It has also been alleged that the petitioner has been made accused because of the fact that he had fled away with a young boy and had illicit relation with several women. By virtue of his position it is alleged that the petitioner has misled several devotees in the USA. On an application filed before the District Judge, Patna on 22.7.2003 it was directed that the General Secretary of the Parbandhak Committee should take action against accused no.1. The order is at Annexure 6 to the complaint petition. The complainant has also stated that there are several criminal cases pending against the petitioner which have been described at paragraph 16 of the complaint petition. The complainant has also stated that he has filed several complaints against accused no.1 before the Additional Director General of Police Vigilance, Bihar for enquiry with respect to the fact that the accused has obtained a passport by giving false information. The complainant has also 3 informed the Foreign Secretary of India and the Home Secretary of India with a copy to the Director, C.B.I. regarding the aforesaid facts on 28.2.2006 which is at Annexure 11 series of the complaint petition. On the basis of the aforesaid allegations the said complaint has been filed containing as many as thirteen annexures, addressed to different authorities making a complaint with respect to alleged misdeeds of the accused no.1. It is apparent from the facts of this case that the dispute is with respect to the management of the Parbandhak committee and this dispute has engaged the Sikh community for a long time and finally with the intervention of the court there is some sort of peace and a solution has been sought to be effected. All the allegations made against accused no.1 have already been reported to various authorities who are the competent persons to look into the facts. These allegations have been raised from the year 2003-05 and till today none of the authorities have come forward to support or to give a finding with respect to any part of the allegations made on behalf of the complainant. The court has dismissed the complaint on the ground that it is completely frivolous made by a person who in fact has no concern with the facts alleged. The order, dated 12.12.2006 passed by the Subdivisional Judicial Magistrate, Patna was challenged by filing a criminal revision. By order, dated 8.10.2007 the revision application has been dismissed and the court has not found any merit with regard to the allegations as it is said that the allegations do not constitute an offence. 4 After perusing in detail the allegations in the complaint petition as well as the orders of the court I find that there is no illegality in the same This application is, thus, dismissed. haque (Sheema Ali Khan, J.)