CRM No.M-2646 of 2009 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM No.M-2646 of 2009 (O& M) Date of decision: 28.09.2011 Lal Singh & ors. ......Petitioners Versus State of Punjab & another ......Respondents CORAM:HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH Present: Mr.C.L.Pawar, Advocate, for the petitioners, Mr.Vishal Munjal, Addl. AG, Punjab, Mr.Naresh Jain, Advocate, for respondent No. 2. ****** Augustine George Masih J. (Oral) Prayer in the present petition is for quashing the FIR No.164, dated 12.11.2007 under Sections 447, 511, 506, 148, 149 IPC, registered at Police Station City, Roop Nagar, District Ropar (Annexure P1) and all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom. Counsel for the petitioners contends that on bare reading of the FIR (Annexure P1), none of the offences for which the petitioners are accused, is made out. As a matter of fact, no such incidence had taken place. In the FIR, what is alleged is that the petitioners were trying to pull out iron angle on which fencing was done with an intention to take possession of the land. He contends CRM No.M-2646 of 2009 2 that the petitioners were six in number and the complainant party, as per the FIR, were four people. But, except for the threat, which is alleged to have been given by the petitioners, no further act is alleged to have been committed by the petitioners. He, on this basis, prays for quashing of the FIR and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom. Counsel for the respondent- State submits that the challan has been presented and even the charge has been framed, and therefore, the present petition does not call for any interference of this Court. However, he could not dispute the fact as also the counsel for the complainant that except for the allegation that an effort has been made by the petitioners to up-root the iron angle, no other overt act has been attributed. I have heard counsel for the parties and have gone through the record of the case. The allegations as made in the FIR do not appear to be plausible and on the face of it, therefore, do not appear to be correct. As per the FIR, the petitioners were six in number and they were having spades and ganti. Nothing has come on record that any of these iron angles was up-rooted. The said instruments have also not been recovered from the petitioners as stated by the counsel for the State on instructions from Sub Inspector - Singara Singh, Police Station City, Roop Nagar, District Ropar, who is present in the Court. Further, it is apparent that merely because the CRM No.M-2646 of 2009 3 complainant and along with him, three other friends of his had come on the spot, the petitioners would have run away if they would have come there to take possession of the land. It has not come on record that they had actually taken possession or interfered or had entered the land in question. All these things go to show that no such incidence had taken place and an effort has been made on the part of the respondents to involve the petitioners in some litigation. Stating no further except that as cognizable offences alleged to have been committed by the petitioners are not made out from the bare reading of the FIR, the same cannot be sustained, and therefore, deserve to be quashed. In view of the above, the present petition is allowed, FIR No. 164 dated 12.11.2007 under Sections 447, 511, 506, 148, 149 IPC, Police Station City, Roop Nagar, District Ropar (Annexure P-1) is hereby quashed. It goes without saying that all consequential proceedings arising therefrom shall also be deemed to have been quashed. 28.09.2011 (AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH) Sailesh JUDGE