IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Criminal Miscellaneous No. M-4136 of 2010 (O & M) Date of Decision: August 09, 2011 Ruby .....PETITIONER(S) VERSUS Shashi Pal & another .....RESPONDENT(S) . . . CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: - Mr. Lakhwinder Singh Sidhu, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Ashok Giri, Advocate, for respondent No.1. Mr. B.S. Saini, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Haryana. . . . AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral) 1. The petition seeks quashing of criminal complaint titled ‘Shashi Pal Seth vs. Ruby’ (Annexure P-2) and order of summoning dated 28.10.2009 (Annexure P-3) vide which the petitioner has been summoned to stand trial for commission of offence under Section 500 IPC. 2. It has been pointed out that the petitioner got Crl. Misc. No. M-4136 of 2010 [2] registered FIR No.235 dated 24.6.2008, Police Station, Tripuri, Patiala, for commission of offence under Sections 406, 498-A IPC against respondent, Shashi Pal Seth and others. The said case is pending trial. At this stage, in counter blast, respondent Shashi Pal Seth has filed criminal complaint alleging commission of offence by the petitioner under Section 500 IPC. The plea in the complaint is that by lodging of a false FIR, the respondent has been defamed. 3. Consideration of the events indicates that result of trial in the FIR case would be relevant to see whether respondent has been defamed and offence under Section 500 IPC has been committed, as alleged in the complaint. In such circumstances and in peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, it would be just and appropriate to direct the Trial Court viz. Judicial Magistrate, Kaithal, to defer the proceedings in the complaint case till final result in FIR case is received from the Trial Court. 4. Ordered accordingly. 5. The petition is disposed of with the above directions. (AJAI LAMBA) August 09, 2011 JUDGE avin 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?