IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CRM No.-M-15692 of 2009 (O&M) Date of Decision: 6.7.2009. Iqbal Singh and others ....Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and another ...Respondents CORAM : Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present:- Mr. Arvind Kashyap, Advocate for the petitioners. RAJESH BINDAL, J. **** Prayer in the present petition is for quashing of complaint filed by respondent No.2 against the petitioners. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that in the alleged occurrence which took place on July 22, 2008 at around 7;00 p.m the petitioners got FIR registered against respondent No.2 on July 26, 2008. Subsequently respondent No.2 filed a complaint on August 18, 2008 on the basis of same incident stating therein that his version was not correct and further as he was under the influence of some intoxicant, the same having been administered to him, he could not narrate the whole incident. Learned Court below summoned the petitioners in the complaint filed by respondent No.2. The challan in the FIR, which was got registered by the petitioner No.1 against respondent No.2/complainant, has already been presented. In the complaint filed by respondent No.2 petitioners have been summoned. Considering the fact that version in the FIR as well as in the complaint arise out of the same alleged incident where fight had taken place between the parties I do not find any reason to quash the complaint which was filed by respondent No.2 against the petitioners No.1 to 7 . As far as petitioner No.8 is concerned learned counsel for the petitioners has raised an argument that he is residing in District Ludhiana which is not within the territorial jurisdiction of the Court at Fatehgarh Sahib where he has been arrayed as accused in a complaint filed by respondent No.2 and has CRM No.-M-15692 of 2009 (O&M) -2- been wrongly summoned in violation of provisions of Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. The procedure provided therein has not been followed. As far as challenge to summoning order of petitioner No.8 on that ground is concerned the petitioner may avail of his alternative remedy of revision before learned Court below. The petition is disposed of. (RAJESH BINDAL) 6.7.2009 JUDGE Reema