CRM No. M-31519 of 2008 -1-` IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH CRM No. M-31519 of 2008 (O&M) Date of Decision : 15.02.2011 Onkar Singh & another .......... petitioners Versus State of Punjab & others ...... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE Ms. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI Present : Mr. Sanjay Gupta, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Raghbir Chaudhary, Sr. DAG, Punjab. **** RITU BAHRI, J. Present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing FIR No. 130 dated 11.12.1996 under Sections 419, 120-B IPC registered at Police Station Nawanshahr and all subsequent proceedings arising out of the same. Brief facts of the case are as follows :- That petitioner No.1 was born on 5.9.1971 and petitioner No.2 was born on 23.3.1970. The marriage of the petitioners took place on 17.5.1993 in village Karnala Tehsil Nawanshahr, District Jalandhar. An application was submitted by the petitioners before the Registrar of Marriages Nawanshahr on 2.1.1994 for registration of CRM No. M-31519 of 2008 -2-` their marriage. The Registrar of Marriages Nawanshahr issued a marriage certificate on 2.2.1994 (Annexure P-3). The petitioners then left to New York and have been residing there peacefully. One Nasib Singh made an application to the Senior Superintendent of Police, Nawanshahr and on the basis of which an FIR No. 130 dated 11.12.1996 was registered in police station Nawanshahr under Section 419/ 120-B IPC against Tara Singh. As per the contents of the FIR, Tara Singh Namberdar indulge in attesting documents and indulge in wrong means to do so. After the inquiry, challan was presented against the petitioners along with Tara Singh Lambardar, Jasbir Singh brother of the petitioner, Such Singh, Sudagar Singh. After presentation of challan the trial was proceeded against Tara Singh, Jasbir Singh, Such Singh and Sudagar Singh. On the basis of evidence led, all the accused were acquitted of the charge vide judgment dated 17.1.2008 (Annexure P- 4). In the judgment it has been observed that this was an initiation of criminal proceedings on the basis of malice, as not even a single witness has supported the story of the prosecution. Tara Singh & others were acquitted by holding that there was no misrepresentation and no offence punishable under Section 419 IPC was made out. The petitioners case is that they are residing in USA and have come to know that they have been declared proclaimed offender in the above case. In the FIR, there are no allegations against the petitioners. The only allegation is that Tara Singh had CRM No. M-31519 of 2008 -3-` wrongly attested a marriage certificate, when he appeared before the Marriage officer for the purpose of getting a marriage registered. Mr. Sanjay Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioners contends that all the three accused in the FIR have been acquitted after the Court has found that this was a case registered on the basis of malice. The prosecution has not been able to prove any conspiracy between the accused. The complainant Nasib Singh has admitted that Onkar s/o Tarlochan Singh was married to Parminder Kaur, hence, no offence punishable under Section 419 IPC was made out against the petitioners. The learned counsel for the petitioner argued that in the passport, petitioner has been described as son of Tarlochan Singh. The petitioners were declared as proclaimed offender while they were residing in USA. They were not properly served to appear, therefore, the order declaring them proclaimed offenders under Section 82 Cr.P.C. could not have been passed. Learned counsel for the petitioners has placed reliance on the judgment of this Court in the case Criminal Misc. No. 41542- M of 2003 titled Sohan Singh Vs. State of Punjab, decided on 16.12.2005 to contend that in a situation where petitioners were resident of Canada and had not visited India for the last 15/16 years, they were wrongly declared as proclaimed offender. This was a case under Section 498-A IPC. There was no direct allegation against the petitioner Sohan Singh in the FIR in that case. Mr. Raghbir Chaudhary, Sr. DAG, Punjab has argued that the petitioners should present themselves before the learned trial CRM No. M-31519 of 2008 -4-` Court to face trial, who can see whether the offence is made out against the petitioners or not. In view of the fact that the main accused have been acquitted and the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate has categorically held that the prosecution was unable to prove any conspiracy between the accused and the complainant Nasib Singh had admitted the marriage of Onakar Singh with Parminder Kaur, no offence under Section 419, 120-B IPC was made out. The petitioners have been residing in USA ever since they got married on 17.5.1993. The FIR was registered at their back and they were declared proclaimed offender without prior service as contemplated under Section 82(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. There are no direct allegations in the FIR against the petitioners. The FIR had been registered to inquire into the alleged wrong doings of Tara Singh. Once he has been acquitted, no case is made out against the petitioners for facing trial. In my considered opinion, the FIR and all the proceedings emanating therefrom are an abuse of the process of law, therefore, should be quashed. Consequently, the criminal miscellaneous is allowed. The FIR No. 130 dated 11.12.1996 under Sections 419, 120-B IPC registered at Police Station Nawanshahr against the petitioners, and all proceedings emanating therefrom, including the order declaring the petitioners as proclaimed offender, are quashed. 15.02.2011 (RITU BAHRI) 'sp' JUDGE