Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 10, Cited by 0]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Baltej Singh And Another vs State Of Punjab And Another on 24 March, 2022

Author: Gurvinder Singh Gill

Bench: Gurvinder Singh Gill

         In The High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana
                       At Chandigarh

                                               CRM-10337-2022 in/and
                                               CRM-M-10360-2020 (O&M)
                                               Date of Decision:- 24.3.2022

Baltej Singh and another                                         ... Petitioners

                                   Versus

State of Punjab and another                                      ... Respondents


CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL


Present:-       Mr. K.B.S.Mann, Advocate, for the petitioners.

                Mr. Anmol S. Sandhu, AAG, Punjab.

                Mr. K.P.S.Dhindsa, Advocate, for respondent No.2.

                (Proceedings conducted through video conferencing)

                *****

GURVINDER SINGH GILL, J. (Oral)

CRM-10337-2022 In view of the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed and the matter is preponed from 13.7.2022 and is taken on Board today itself.

CRM-M-10360-2020 (O&M) The petitioners have approached this Court seeking quashing of FIR No. 124, dated 22.11.2018, Police Station Kotbhai, District Sri Muktsar Sahib, under Sections 342, 323, 34 IPC (Sections 451, 353, 186, 509 IPC vide rapat No.27 dated 24.11.2018 added later on).





                                      1 of 4
                   ::: Downloaded on - 25-03-2022 01:39:39 :::
                                -2-                  CRM-M-10360-2020 (O&M)

At the time of issuance of notice of motion, this Court while considering that two of the offences alleged are offences under Sections 353 and 186 IPC, had noticed that it is a case where it would be debatable as to whether the offences under Sections 353 and 186 IPC are made out or not since, the injuries caused could not be said to have been caused for the purpose of obstructing the complainant from discharge of his official duties. The relevant extract from order dated 12.3.2020 reads as follows:

"The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that although the FIR was initially registered in respect of offences under Sections 342 and 323 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code but subsequently offences under Sections 441, 353 and 186 of Indian Penal Code were also added, which infact would not be attracted to the present case inasmuch as it is a case where the alleged occurrence is more in the nature of an occurrence in individual capacity and the alleged injuries were not caused for the purpose of obstructing the complainant. The learned counsel for the petitioners has drawn the attention of this Court to the FIR, wherein the allegations are to the fact that the accused namely Baltej Singh (Peon) and Rajdeep Singh (Peon) manhandled the complainant in his office by locking the door.

Keeping in view the aforesaid allegations, it would certainly be debatable as to whether any offence under Sections 186 or 353 IPC would be made out or as to whether it is an offence of causing injuries stictly in individual capacity only. The learned counsel has submitted that the matter, in any case, has been amicably resolved amongst the parties."

The relevant translated gist of FIR reads as follows:





                                  2 of 4
               ::: Downloaded on - 25-03-2022 01:39:39 :::
                                 -3-                  CRM-M-10360-2020 (O&M)

"To the S.H.O. KotBhai Sri Muktsar Sahib Sub:-

Regarding Man-handling of Dr. R.K.Mishra. Sir, This is for your information and necessary action that Mr. Baltej Singh (Peon) and Rajdeep Singh (Peon) man-handled me in the Director's Chamber after locking the door at 9.45 a.m. on 22.11.2018. So, I request you to do the needful and take the necessary action against the Culprits and file an F.I.R. against both of them With Regards. Dr. Rajesh Kumar Mishra Sd/- Rajesh Kumar Mishra Honorary Director P.U.R.C. Kauni Sri Muktsar Sahib. Police Action: Abovesaid complaint was received today at police post Doda from the contents of the complaint offence under Sections 342/323/34 IPC are made out against Baltej Singh son of Balbir Singh caste Jat resident of Kauni and Rajdeep Singh son of Balwinder Singh caste Jat resident of Doda are made out. Therefore the complaint is being sent through Ct. Jaskaran Singh number 1512/SMS to police station Kotbhai. After the registration of the case number be intimated. I alongwith other officials are busy in investigation. Sd/- Joginder ASI, I/C."
A perusal of the FIR would show that it is a case where the petitioners who are both working as Peons, in the office of the complainant who is a Director had manhandled him and had locked him in a room.
There is nothing in the FIR to suggest that the said manhandling or beating if any had been given in order to obstruct the complainant in discharge of his official duties. Rather, it appears that the act has been done by the accused to vent out some kind of frustrations which they might be having being employees and working under the complainant who was their Boss.
As already stated above, there is no reference at all to any kind of intention on the part of the petitioners to obstruct the complainant in

3 of 4 ::: Downloaded on - 25-03-2022 01:39:39 :::

-4- CRM-M-10360-2020 (O&M) discharge of his official duties. In these circumstances, it will certainly be debatable as to whether offences under Section 353 and 186 IPC can be attracted in the present case or not.

In any case, since the matter has been compromised and pursuant to order dated 12.3.2020, the statements of the parties had been recorded by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1 st Class, Gidderbaha, and as per report of learned Judicial Magistrate 1 st Class, the compromise has been found to be genuine and has been entered into out of free will of the parties, no purpose would be served by continuation of the proceedings against the petitioners.

In view of the aforesaid discussion and bearing in mind the law laid down by Full Bench of this Court in 2007(3) RCR (Crl.) 1052 Kulwinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab, the present petition is allowed and FIR No. 124, dated 22.11.2018, Police Station Kotbhai, District Sri Muktsar Sahib, under Sections 342, 323, 34 IPC (Sections 451, 353, 186, 509 IPC vide rapat No.27 dated 24.11.2018 added later on) and all subsequent proceedings emanating therefrom are hereby quashed qua the petitioners.




24.3.2022                                        (GURVINDER SINGH GILL)
mohan                                                    JUDGE


               Whether speaking /reasoned        Yes / No

               Whether Reportable                Yes / No




                                      4 of 4
                   ::: Downloaded on - 25-03-2022 01:39:39 :::