Criminal Misc. No. M 3486 of 2009 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No. M 3486 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision:19-4-2010 Hira Singh and others ......... Petitioners Vs State of Punjab and another .........Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARBANS LAL Present: Mr. A.S.Kalra, Advocate, for the petitioners Mr. K.D.Sachdeva, Additional Advocate General, Punjab None for respondent No.2 HARBANS LAL, J. This petition has been moved by Hira Singh, Mangat Singh, Jaswant Singh, Piara Singh, Dhian Singh and Sinder Singh under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for quashing of F.I.R. No. 174 dated 11.11.2008 under Sections 431/506/148/149 of IPC and 27 of the Arms Act and further proceedings arising therefrom. On 11.11.2008 Gurdeep Singh son of Jawand Singh, resident of Burj Mohamad Shah Police Station Makhu made statement before ASI Raj Singh, Incharge Police Post Joggewala, in the terms that “today (referring to 11.11.2008) at about 8.00 a.m. I was present in my house. Ujjagar Singh son of Santa Singh resident of Burj Mohamad Shah was also standing near me. Meanwhile, Hira Singh, Mangal Singh, Dhian Singh, Shinder Singh, Piara Singh, Jaswant Singh alongwith others came on tractor belonging to Nishan Singh. Jaswant Singh was duly armed with Moizer 30 bore. His co- Criminal Misc. No. M 3486 of 2009 (O&M) 2 accused were holding dangs. Piara Singh started ploughing the path leading to my fields. When I prevented them from doing so, they started hurling abuses apart from threats to us. Jaswant Singh took out his moizer and held out a threat that if any body came forward he may be killed. Due to fear I went back.” On the basis of this statement, the case was registered. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties, besides perusing the record with due care and circumspection. The learned counsel for the petitioner eloquently urged that Wajir Singh, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sub Division Zira, District Ferozepur in his affidavit filed on behalf of State of Punjab has solemnly affirmed that “on 25.5.2009 the respondent No.2 (referring to Gurdeep Singh complainant) appeared before the Court and made statement that the present petitioners/accused are not those persons who had ploughed the passage, threatened and abused him. So, in these circumstances in view of removal of the Section 431 of IPC and statement of complainant, the present petition has become infructuous.” In view of this reply, the F.I.R. qua the petitioners is liable to be quashed. To overcome these submissions, the learned State Counsel maintained that only Section 431 of IPC has been dropped. The F.I.R. in relation to the other offences is not liable to be quashed. This contention merits rejection for the reasons to be recorded hereunder:- It is manifestly clear from the above reply that the complainant Gurdeep Singh himself has testified before the Court that the petitioners are not those persons who had ploughed the passage or held out threats or abused him. In view of this statement F.I.R. No. 174 dated 11.11.2008 (Annexure P-1) under Sections 506/148/149 of IPC and Section 27 of the Criminal Misc. No. M 3486 of 2009 (O&M) 3 Arms Act registered at Police Station Makhu and further proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed qua the petitioners. Since the main petition has been decided, all pending Criminal Miscellaneous,if any, also stand disposed of. (HARBANS LAL) JUDGE April 19, 2010 RSK NOTE: Whether to be referred to the Reporter or not? Yes/No