Cr.Misc. M 28104 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYNA AT CHANDIGARH. Cr.Misc. M 28104 of 2010 Date of decision:23.9.2010 Parveen Kumari and ors Petitioner vs. Iqbal Kaur Respondent Present: Mr. Pankaj Jain, Advocate. M.M.S.BEDI,J. The petitioners seek quashing of the criminal complaint (Annexure P-1) filed at the instance of Iqbal Kaur against petitionres 1 to 4 on the ground that the State case, arising out of the same occurrence, registered at the instance of petitioner No.1 Parveen Kumari has already been decided vide jdugment dated 20.8.2009. The findings given in the said judgment have got a direct bearing on merits of the complaint, filed by Iqbal Kaur respondent No.2, which has been used as a defence evidence in the criminal proceedings in FIR No.92 dated 22.8.2002 lodged by petitioner No.1. Referring to the contents of the judgment dated 20.8.2009 the presence of petitioners 2,3 and 4 at the time of the alleged assault on complainant – respondent No.2 Iqbal Kaur is absolutely ruled out. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and I am of the opinion that the judicial propriety demandes that the criminal case, arising out of FIR 92 dated 22.8.2002 decided on 20.8.2009 should have been decided simultaneously with the complaint filed by Iqbal Kaur ( who was accused in the said criminal case ) but since the SDJM, Anandpur Sahib has already decided the said case and the cross complaint has yet to be Cr.Misc. M 28104 of 2010 2 decided, the probability of the finding in judgment dated 20.8.2009 affecting the adjudication of the complaint cannot be ruled out. It appears that the judgment dated 20.8.2009 has not yet been produced, in accordance with law, before the court as evidence in the complaint of Iqbal Kaur. No ground is made out for quashing the complaint, especially when the same had been filed in the year 2002 and the evidence has been led but in the interest of justice, the only relief, which can be granted to petitioners 2 to 4, at this stage, is that in case they move an application for exemption from personal appearance in proceedings, arising out of private complaint of Iqbal Kaur, the said application would be allowed by the trial court subject to any conditions imposed by it. Evidence, if any, can be recorded in presence of their counsel, as per the provisions of Section 273 Cr.P.C. Disposed of. September 23 ,2010 ( M.M.S.BEDI ) TSM JUDGE