In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh Crl. Revision No. 2477 of 2002 Date of decision: February 13, 2009 Krishan Chand ... Petitioner Vs. State of Punjab and others ... Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.N. Jindal Present: Mr. Kuldip Sanwal, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Simsi Dhir, AAG, Punjab. Mr. Gurcharan Dass, Advocate for the respondents No.2 and 3. A.N. Jindal, J Challenge in this revision petition is to the order dated 29.8.2002, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Fatehgarh Sahib, vide which the accused-respondents (herein referred as “the respondents”) were discharged for the offence under Sections 447, 427, 506 IPC. The trial court had originally framed the charge, whereas, the learned Sessions Judge, Fatehgarh Sahib discharged them. From the bare allegations as mentioned in the FIR, it transpires that it does not contain the time, place and the manner in which the occurrence had taken place. There are merely vague allegations that the respondents were in illegal occupation of the electric motor of the petitioner-complainant and the respondents were illegally using the same and obstructing him from using it. These allegations only entail a civil action and the FIR could be framed only if an overt-act is shown to have been committed by the respondents, particulars of which are required to be essentially mentioned. Hence, finding no merit in the petition the same is dismissed. February 13, 2009 (A.N. Jindal) deepak Judge