Punjab-Haryana High Court
Raghu Nath Sharma vs State Of Haryana And Anr on 23 September, 2024
Author: Karamjit Singh
Bench: Karamjit Singh
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:125902
CRM-M-35068-2018 [1]
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-35068-2018
Date of decision: 23.09.2024
Raghu Nath Sharma ...Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and another ...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KARAMJIT SINGH
Present: Mr. Manoj Kaushik, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Karan Garg, AAG, Haryana.
****
KARAMJIT SINGH, J. (ORAL)
1. The present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner seeking quashing of Kalandra under Section 182 IPC Annexure P-1 registered at Police Station City Gurgaon (Gurugram) and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom including order Annexure P-2 dated 23.05.2018 passed by the learned trial Court whereby charge under Section 182 IPC was framed against the petitioner and order dated 24.07.2018 (Annexure P-3) passed by the revisional Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Gurugram.
2. The counsel for the petitioner while assailing the Kalandra and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom submits that in the instant case, the petitioner gave one complaint Annexure P-4 dated 28.10.2016 to Commissioner of Police, Gurgaon and CM window. As per respondent No.1-State, the allegations made by the petitioner in the said complaint could not be corroborated and resultantly, the said complaint was filed and 1 of 3 ::: Downloaded on - 25-09-2024 02:38:56 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:125902 CRM-M-35068-2018 [2] recommendation was made to file Kalandra under Section 182 IPC against the present petitioner. That consequently, Kalandra Annexure P-1 was presented in the Court concerned by Inspector Vikram Nehra, the then SHO, Police Station City Gurugram. The counsel for the petitioner further submits that as per the provisions of Section 195 Cr.P.C Kalandra Annexure P-1 could have been presented either by the public servant concerned or the authority/officer superior to him. In the present case, the concerned public servant is Commissioner of Police, Gurgaon (Gurugram) to whom the complaint Annexure P-4 was presented by the petitioner. The Kalandra Annexure P-1 being filed by SHO of concerned police station who is junior to the aforesaid public servant, is not sustainable in the eyes of law and desrves to be set aside.
3. The present petition is resisted by the State counsel who submits that the complaint Annexure P-4 submitted by the petitioner was found to be false and accordingly, proceedings under Section 182 Cr.P.C were initiated against the petitioner by presenting Kalandra Annexure P-1. It is further submitted that the trial Court rightly gave notice of accusation to the petitioner vide Annexure P-2. The State counsel further submits that the present petition deserves to be dismissed being devoid of merits.
4. I have considered the submissions made by counsel for the parties.
5. It is evident that complaint with regard to offence punishable under Section 182 IPC, as per provision contained under Section 195 Cr.P.C has to be maintained either by the public servant to whom such complaint was presented or an officer superior to him. Undoubtedly, complaint 2 of 3 ::: Downloaded on - 25-09-2024 02:38:57 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:125902 CRM-M-35068-2018 [3] Annexure P-4 was given by the petitioner to Commissioner of Police, Gurgaon (Gurugram). On inquiry, it was found that allegations leveled by the petitioner in complaint Annexure P-4 could not be corroborated and thus, action under Section 182 IPC was contemplated against the petitioner. Consequently, SHO Police Station City Gurugram presented Kalandra Annexure P-1 against the present petition in the Court concerned. In the light of the law laid down by this Court in Jarnail Singh Vs. The State of Punjab and others 1983 (1) RCR Criminal 540, the Kalandra Annexure P-1 presented by SHO of the concerned police station is not maintainable as per the mandate of Section 195 Cr.P.C, as the complaint Annexure P-4 which was made by the petitioner was addressed to Commissioner of Police Gurgaon (Gurugram). Kalandra Annexure P-1 suffers from inherent procedural defect and was not presented in consonance with the provisions of Section 195 Cr.P.C and thus, deserves to be quashed.
6. In light of the above, the present petition is allowed and Kalandra Annexure P-1 and orders Annexure P-2 and P-3 passed by the learned trial Court and revisional Court respectively and all the subsequent proceedings thereto are hereby ordered to be quashed.
7. Petition stands allowed.
23.09.2024 (KARAMJIT SINGH)
Yogesh JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No
Whether reportable:- Yes/No
3 of 3
::: Downloaded on - 25-09-2024 02:38:57 :::