IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No. 22719-M of 1999 Date of decision: 7th July, 2008 Jagdev Singh and others … Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and another … Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA Present: Mr. S.S.Narula, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Mehardeep Singh, Assistant Advocate General Punjab for the State. KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. (ORAL) Present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing the case FIR No. 39 dated 11.04.1998 registered at Police Station Kotwali, Faridkot under Section 406, 420, 467, 468 and 471 IPC. Counsel for the petitioner has read the FIR before me. FIR has been annexed as Annexure P-8. From the perusal of the FIR, it is evident that the name of Bhagwan Kaur and Malkiat Singh surface nowhere. Mr.Narula has stated that petitioner No.1-Jagdev Singh had died and present petition qua him was dismissed on 24th October, 2002. A bare reading of the FIR discloses that complainant Jagdev Singh and Jagdip Singh used to deal in property together. It is stated that the share of Jagdev Singh has been sold by Jagdip Singh but the sale proceeds have not been accounted for. CRM No. 22719-M of 1999 Jagdev Singh has died during the pendency of the present petition. Bhagwan Kaur is widow of Jagdev Singh and Malkiat Singh is son of Jagdev Singh. As stated above, in the FIR, there is not even a word against them. Counsel for Bhagwan Kaur and Malkiat Singh has not placed on record copy of the report under section 173 Cr.P.C. and statements recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., from which it could be deciphered whether any role has been assigned to Bhagwan Kaur and Malkiat Singh or not. The counsel for the petitioner has further contended that from the bare perusal of the FIR, it is clear that offence was essentially of civil nature. Since, before this Court copy of challan along with statements have not been filed, this Court will not be able to adjudicate upon the arguments raised by the counsel for the petitioner. In the present case, report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. has been submitted. Next step to be taken before the trial Court is, consideration of charge. The arguments raised before me, in case the same are raised before trial Court and trial Court finds merit in their contention, petitioners will be always in a position to persuade the Court for their discharge. In the present case, FIR was registered on 11.04.1998. Ten years are going to elapse. Bhagwan Kaur is a widow. Therefore, I dispose off the present petition by directing the petitioners to raise all arguments at the time of consideration of charge. Since the present petition is pending in this Court for last ten years, it will be appropriate that personal appearance 2 CRM No. 22719-M of 1999 of the petitioners is exempted before the trial Court, subject to their furnishing an undertaking that they shall cause their appearance as and when called for and the evidence recorded in their absence but in the presence of their counsel shall be binding upon them. The trial Court may specify any other conditions in the undertaking. With these observations, present petition is disposed off. [KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA] JUDGE July 7, 2008 rps 3