Crl. Misc. No. M-19419 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-19419 of 2011 (O & M) DATE OF DECISION: July 19, 2011 Roshan Garg .........PETITIONER(S) VERSUS State of Punjab and another ........ RESPONDENT(S) CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA Present: Mr. Maninder Arora, Advocate, for the petitioner(s). AJAI LAMBA, J. (ORAL) 1. This petition has been filed by an accused in FIR No. 134 dated 13.06.2011 under Section 420 IPC, P.S. Derabassi, District Mohali. 2. Contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the complainant-respondent no. 2 earlier filed a complaint before the police two years back. Inquiry was conducted and it was concluded that no cognizable offence has been committed. It has been pleaded that in the second complaint, FIR has been lodged. 3. Learned counsel contends that if the facts and circumstances are seen pragmatically, it would be concluded that no offence has been committed by the petitioner. 4. I have considered the contention of the learned counsel. 5. Process of investigation involves systematic inquiry into an alleged incident or transaction from its genesis till its conclusion, with a view to search out and examine the particulars about something hidden, Crl. Misc. No. M-19419 of 2011 2 which would include motive, manner in which the incident or transaction has taken place and involvement of the accused (directly or indirectly), in the said incident or transaction, with their exact and specific roles. 6. Informant or complainant makes a report in regard to a happening/incident/transaction which has taken place. On such report, the Investigating Agency undertakes investigation under Chapter XII, Code of Criminal Procedure, in a systematic manner. When needle of suspicion goes towards a particular person viz. the accused, his role is required to be investigated, in detail. However, the version of the complainant is one sided. The alleged accused might be innocent and might be in a position to establish his presence elsewhere or involvement of other accused, who might be the real players in the incident or transaction. 7. The incident or transaction is to be investigated in the context of the persons, who are involved in causing it. In such circumstances, it becomes imperative for the Investigating Agency to also look into the facts, as projected by the accused. An application given by the complainant might be tainted or driven out of selfish motive and might be de hors the true facts. Manifest injustice can be caused, in case, the version given out by the accused is not inquired or investigated. In such circumstances, it is as imperative to inquire and investigate the version given by the accused as is important and relevant to investigate the version given out by the complainant or informant. 8. Circumstances surrounding the incident or transaction would also play an important role. Medico-legal report, report received from the Forensic Science Laboratory, D.N.A. finger prints, etc. would help the investigating agency to verify whether the complainant is telling the truth or Crl. Misc. No. M-19419 of 2011 3 version of the accused is more believable. So many instances have come to the notice of the Court wherein the complainant, after committing the offence, has gone to the police to make a complaint while indicating the needle of suspicion in other misleading direction. 9. Considering the above, this petition is disposed of with directions to the Investigating Officer to also consider the stand of the petitioner as given out in this petition. Investigation would be conducted as regards the stand of the petitioner also and only thereafter final report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. shall be prepared. 19.07.2011 (AJAI LAMBA) shivani JUDGE 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?