Crl. Misc. M-15547 of 2010 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh. Crl. Misc. M-15547 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: 08.11.2011 Dharampal ....Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and another ....Respondents. Coram:- Hon'ble Mr. Justice Augustine George Masih. ... Present: None for the petitioner. Mr. Vishal Munjal, Addl. A.G., Punjab for the State. ... Augustine George Masih, J.(Oral) Prayer in the present petition is for quashing of the FIR No.39 dated 13.5.2009 under Section 188 IPC registered at Police Station Balachaur and all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the ground that the same is in violation of Section 195 (1) Cr.P.C. It is the contention of the petitioner that for offences punishable under Sections 172 to 188 IPC, as per provisions contained in Section 195 (1) Cr.P.C., no Court can take cognizance except on a complaint in writing from public servant concerned or some other public servant to whom he is administratively subordinate. Since no complaint has been filed, instead the present FIR has been lodged against the petitioner for violation of Section 144 Cr.P.C., under which during the Lok Sabha elections, prohibitory orders Crl. Misc. M-15547 of 2010 2 were promulgated by the District Magistrate, SBS Nagar, the petitioner alongwith another person, was found present in the shop of Hari Ram near the godown of Food Corporation of India in the area of Balachaur, which violates Section 195(1) Cr.P.C. and it would not be open to the police to register a case against an offender for offence under Section 188 IPC and then submit report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. to the concerned Court. Reliance has also been placed on a Division Bench judgement of this Court in the case of Jiwan Kumar Vs. State of Punjab and others, 2009(1) RCR (Criminal) 415, wherein this very proposition has been settled. Counsel for the respondents submits that the petitioner has violated the prohibitory order imposed by the District Magistrate under Section 144 Cr.P.C. and therefore, has been booked under Section 188 IPC, which provides for an offence to be committed by a person for disobedience of the order duly promulgated by the public servant. The petitioner having violated the said order, has rightly been, after registration of the FIR and investigation, summoned by the Court below. He, accordingly, prays for dismissal of the present petition. I have heard learned counsel for the respondents and have gone through the record of the case. FIR No.39 dated 13.5.2009 has been registered against the petitioner alongwith another person, under Section 188 IPC, which could not have been registered in the light of the provisions contained in Section 195 (1) Cr.P.C., which mandates initiation of proceedings for violation of any offence alleged to have been committed punishable under Sections 172 to 188 IPC on a complaint in writing of the public servant concerned or some other public servant to whom he is administratively subordinate. If it Crl. Misc. M-15547 of 2010 3 is not done in this manner, no court can take cognizance thereof. The Division Bench judgement of this Court in the case of Jiwan Kumar (supra) covers the case of the petitioner on all fronts. Therefore, the FIR registered against the petitioner cannot sustain. In view of the above, present petition is allowed. FIR No.39 dated 13.5.2009 under Section 188 IPC registered at Police Station Balachaur and all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed. (Augustine George Masih) Judge 08.11.2011 sk.