IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M- 13711 of 2009(O&M) Date of Decision: 04.05.2010. Jhanda Singh. ...... PETITIONER Versus State of Haryana and another. ...... RESPONDENTS CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA Present: Mr. J.S.Bedi, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. P.M.Anand, Addl..A.G., Haryana. Mr. A.S.Virk, Advocate for respondent No.2. ***** RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral) The present petition has been filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing of criminal complaint No.555/1/05/08, dated 01.05.1998, pending before the court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ambala City, Annexure P8, summoning order dated 04.02.2009, Annexure P11 and all consequential proceedings arising pursuant to the said order. CRM No.M-13711 of 2009 I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the whole record. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the impugned summoning order has been passed by learned Magistrate without taking into consideration the cancellation report submitted by the police in this case. It has been contended that earlier FIR was registered on the same facts on the complaint made by the complainant and that after investigation the police had come to the conclusion that no case was made out and cancellation report was filed. However, before the cancellation report was accepted, a petition was filed on behalf of the complainant before this Court for fair investigation of the case and in that petition order was passed that complainant be heard before accepting the cancellation report. In pursuant to said order protest petition was filed by the complainant in the said cancellation report. However, at the same time criminal complainant was also filed by the complainant on the same facts and after recording the preliminary evidence, the impugned summoning order has been passed by learned Magistrate without taking into consideration the cancellation report and without discussing the same in the impugned order and that petitioner has been summoned just on the basis of preliminary evidence adduced before the Court. Hence, it is contended that the impugned summoning order which has been passed by learned Magistrate without considering and discussing the cancellation report submitted on the basis of investigation, cannot be sustained in the eyes of law and the same cannot be said to have been passed legally by learned Magistrate. On the point, learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance upon 2008(1) RCR(Crl.) 371, Kuldip Raj Mahajan v. Hukam Chand, 1995(3) Crimes 607, Abhi and others v. Arjuna Charan Sutar and 2 CRM No.M-13711 of 2009 2003(3) RCR(Crl.) 729, Annadata Chandra Sekhar Rao and another v. Battiprolu Venkata Basava Subb Rao and another. I have perused the impugned summoning order dated 04.02.2009 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ambala City. Though there is a passing reference of report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. submitted by the police in this case and however, the same has not been discussed and considered by learned Magistrate before passing the impugned order. Hence, in view of these facts, the impugned summoning order dated 04.02.2009, Anenxure P11, passed by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ambala City, is set aside. Learned Magistrate is directed to pass order afresh after considering the cancellation report filed by the police in this case. The present petition is disposed of accordingly. ( RAM CHAND GUPTA ) May 4, 2010. JUDGE 'om' 3