Punjab-Haryana High Court
Rajinder Singh @ Lovely And Others vs State Of Punjab And Others on 6 September, 2023
Author: Vikas Bahl
Bench: Vikas Bahl
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:117296
CRM-M-51812-2022 1 2023:PHHC:117296
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
***
CRM-M-51812-2022
Date of decision : 06.09.2023
Rajinder Singh @ Lovely and others
... Petitioners
Versus
The State of Punjab and others
... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL
Present: Mr.Vijay Rana, Advocate
for the petitioners.
Mr.Ferry Sofat, Addl.A.G. Punjab
for respondents no.1 to 3.
VIKAS BAHL, J.(ORAL)
1. This is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for the issuance of directions to respondents no.2 and 3 to investigate / enquire into the matter through some senior officers of the police or some independent agency as false FIRs have been registered against the petitioners.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that in the year 2012-13, respondent no.4 was holding the post of Minister for the State of Punjab in the Akali Dal Badal Government and during that period, petitioners no.1 and 2 used to support and participate in every political rally of respondent no.4 but in the year 2015 due to certain reasons, petitioners no.1 and 2 separated themselves from him and stopped going to his rally / functions which annoyed respondent no.4 and due to the said aspect, respondent no.4 got petitioners no.1 and 2 implicated in a large number of cases which are false cases. It is further submitted that even petitioners no.3 1 of 6 ::: Downloaded on - 19-09-2023 05:31:38 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:117296 CRM-M-51812-2022 2 2023:PHHC:117296 to 7, who are the supporters of petitioners no.1 and 2, have also been implicated in false cases and thus, a prayer has been made that the respondents be restrained from harassing the petitioners.
2. Learned State counsel has filed status report by way of affidavit of Ramandeep Singh Bhullar, PPS, Assistant Commissioner of Police (Central) Ludhiana on behalf of respondents no.1,2, 3 and 8. The details of the FIRs registered against the petitioners have been given in pararaph 5 of the Status report. The FIRs registered against petitioner no.6 are reproduced hereinbelow:-
"Petitioner no.6 Ashok Kumar alias Soka:-
Sr.No. Particulars of FIRs Status
1. FIR no.25 dated 03.02.2006, u/s 376, 294, 506 IPC, P.S. Division No.6, Ludhiana
2. FIR no.65 dated 05.09.2014, u/s 21, 61, 85 Convicted NDPS Act, P.S. Division No.3, Ludhiana
3. FIR no.9 dated 22.01.2022, u/s 13-A of Trial pending Gambling Act and Section 420 IPC, P.S. Division No.1, Ludhiana.
4. FIR No.87 dated 08.06.2022, u/s 13-A of Trial pending Gambling Act and Section 420 IPC, P.S. Division no.3, Ludhiana.
5. FIR No.70 dated 22.08.2022, u/s 294-A IPC, 13- Trial pending A of Gambling Act and Section 7(3) Lottery Act, P.S. Division No.1, Ludhiana A perusal of the above reproduced FIRs would show that FIR no.65 dated 05.09.2014 was registered against petitioner no.6 in the year 2014 even when, as per the version given by the petitioners in paragraph 2 of their petition that petitioners were working for respondent no.4 as it is only in the year 2015 that a dispute had arisen between them and in the said FIR which was registered under Section 21, 61, 85 of the Narcotic Drugs and Pschytropic Substances Act, petitioner no.6 was convicted. In another FIR at serial no.1 i.e., FIR no.25 dated 03.02.2006 was also registered prior to the year 2015 and is under Sections 376, 294, 506 IPC. With respect to 2 of 6 ::: Downloaded on - 19-09-2023 05:31:38 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:117296 CRM-M-51812-2022 3 2023:PHHC:117296 the FIRs which have been registered in the year 2022, the investigation is complete and the trial is pending and thus, the question as to whether petitioner no.6 is guilty in the said cases or not, can only be determined after considering the evidence which would be led by the prosecution and by petitioner no.6 during the course of trial. From the abovesaid fact, it is also apparent that petitioner no.6 is a habitual offender.
4. In paragraph 5 of the Status report, further details of all the cases filed against all the petitioners have also been mentioned. Relevant portion of paragraph 5 of the status report is reproduced hereinbelow:-
"5. That in compliance to the said order of this Hon'ble Court, it is further submitted that the following FIRs have been registered against the petitioners:-
Petitioner No.1 Rajinder Singh alias Lovely:-
Sr. Particulars of FIRs Status
No.
1. FIR No.33 dated 09.05.2012, u/s 307, 379, 325, Acquitted on
148, 149 IPC, P.S. 24.04.2014 Dugri, Ludhiana. 24.04.2014
2. FIR No.70 dated 28.06.2012, u/s 25, 54, 59 of Acquitted on
Arms Act, P.S. Model Town, Ludhiana. 26.03.2015
3. FIR No.69 dated 28.06.2012, u/s 399, 402 IPC, Trial pending
P.S. Model Town, Ludhiana.
4. FIR No.2 dated 22.01.2016, u/s 13-3-67 of Trial pending
Gambling Act, P.S. Division No.1, Ludhiana.
5. FIR No.81 dated 09.08.2016, u/s 353, 332, 186, Trial pending 323, 427, 283, 34 IPC, P.S. Division No.1, Ludhiana.
6. FIR No.82 dated 20.08.2016, u/s 13-3-67 of Trial pending Gambling Act, 420 IPC and 21, 22, 25, 27 of Arms Act, P.S. Division No.1, Ludhiana.
7. FIR No.42 dated 27.02.2017, u/s 61-1-14 of Trial pending Excise Act, 13-3-67 of Gambling Act, P.S. Division No.1, Ludhiana.
8. FIR No.36 dated 17.02.2017, u/s 334, 379-B, 323, Trial pending 341, 506, 148, 149 IPC, P.S. Division No.1, Ludhiana.
9. FIR No.29 dated 18.02.2017, u/s 323, 341, 382, Trial pending 506, 148, 149 IPC, PS. Division No.4, Ludhiana.
10. FIR No.103 dated 16.06.2005, u/s 302 IPC, P.S. Acquitted Salem Tabri, Ludhiana.
11. FIR No.38/2017, u/s 307, 353, 427, 186, 339, Acquitted 506, 148, 149 IPC and Section 25 of Arms Act, P.S. Sadar, Ludhiana.
12. FIR No.29/2017, u/s 382, 341, 323, 506, 148, 149 IPC, P.S. Division No.4, Ludhiana.
13. FIR No.88 dated 20.09.2022, u/s 294-A IPC, 7(3) In this case the
3 of 6 ::: Downloaded on - 19-09-2023 05:31:38 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:117296 CRM-M-51812-2022 4 2023:PHHC:117296 Lottery Act and the 13-3-67 of Gambling Act, P.S. petitioner on bail. Division No.1, Ludhiana.
Petitioner No.7 Sukhpal Singh alias Sukha:-
Sr. Particulars of FIRs Status
No.
1. FIR No.21 dated 15.01.2020, u/s 307, 506 IPC Acquitted on
and Section 25 of Arms Act, P.S. Division No.7, 11.03.2022
Ludhiana
2. FIR No.87 dated 08.06.2022, u/s 3, 4, 13-3-67 of Trial pending
Gambling Act and Section 420 IPC, P.S. Division No.3, Ludhiana.
3. FIR No.187 dated 08.12.2022, u/s 18-A of Under investigation Gambling Act and 7(3) Lottery Act, P.S. Division No.3, Ludhiana.
Petitioner No.2 Vikas Chhabra:-
Sr. Particulars of FIRs Status
No.
1. FIR No.81 dated 19.08.2016, u/s 13-A of Trial pending
Gambling Act, Sections 353, 186, 332, 323, 283, 34 IPC and Sections 12, 8 P.C. Act, P.S. Sadar Ludhiana.
2. FIR No.82 dated 20.08.2016, u/s 9(2) Lottery Act, Trial pending 420 IPC and 25 of Arms Act, P.S. Division No.1, Ludhiana.
3. FIR No.36 dated 17.02.2017, u/s 384, 379-B, 323, Trial pending 341, 506, 148, 149 IPC, P.S. Division No.1, Ludhiana.
4. FIR No.38 dated 19.02.2017, u/s 307, 353, 386, Trial pending 427, 332, 506, 148, 149, 120-B IPC and Section 25 of Arms Act, P.S. Division No.1, Ludhiana.
5. FIR No.1 dated 04.01.2016, u/s 283 IPC, P.S. Untrace Report filed.
Division No.1, Ludhiana.
6. FIR No.2 dated 22.01.2016, u/s 356, 120-B IPC, Trial pending P.S. Division No.1, Ludhiana.
7. FIR No.69 dated 28.06.2012, u/s Acquitted on 399, 402 IPC, P.S. Model Town, Ludhiana. 29.01.2019
8. FIR No.33 dated 19.05.2012, u/s 307, 379, 392, Acquitted on 397 IPC, P.S. Dugri, Ludhiana. 29.04.2014
9. FIR No.86 dated 23.07.2012, u/s 465, 468, 471, Acquitted on 120-B IPC, P.S. Model Town, Ludhiana, 05.08.2015 A perusal of the above would show that petitioner no.1, for the period from 2012 to 2022, has been involved in 13 cases and out of the said 4 of 6 ::: Downloaded on - 19-09-2023 05:31:38 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:117296 CRM-M-51812-2022 5 2023:PHHC:117296 13 cases, 4 cases are such which were registered prior to the year 2015 i.e., the year in which the dispute had arisen between the petitioners and respondent no.4 as per version of the petitioners. FIRs at sr. no.1,2, 3 and 10 all relate to heinous offences including offences under Sections 302, 307, 399, 402 IPC although in 3 of the said 4 cases, petitioner no.1 has been acquitted. In the other cases, the trial is pending and thus, question as to whether petitioner no.1 is guilty of the offences alleged to have been committed by him, would be finally adjudicated during the course of trial.
5. Learned State counsel has also pointed out that in most of the cases, the complainant is also different. With respect to petitioner no.2, it is apparent that out of 9 FIRs registered against him, 3 FIRs were prior to the year 2015 and it is apparent that petitioner no.2 is also a habitual offender. It is also the stand of the State in paragraph 3 that earlier also the petitioners had filed an application bearing complaint no.ID-76937 dated 05.12.2022 raising similar allegations of false implication and in pursuance of the same, an enquiry was conducted during which it was found that the FIRs have been rightly registered and in the said FIRs, trials are pending. In paragraph 4 of the short reply, it has been stated that the petitioners have filed certain petitions challenging the registration of the said FIRs and details of two such petitions have been given. On a pointed query raised by this Court to learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for the petitioners is unable to state as to how many petitions have been filed by the petitioners seeking quashing of the said FIRs. Nothing has been shown to this Court to show that there is any finding by any Court to the effect that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in any case at the behest of respondent no.4. The prayer made by the petitioners to restrain the respondents from harassing the petitioners and not to register false FIRs, cannot be allowed by 5 of 6 ::: Downloaded on - 19-09-2023 05:31:38 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:117296 CRM-M-51812-2022 6 2023:PHHC:117296 this Court as no blanket order can be passed in favour of the petitioners in the manner prayed for by the petitioners. No law has been cited by the learned counsel for the petitioners in support of the said prayer. Moreover, the question as to whether any case / FIR registered is a false FIR or not, can only be ascertained after perusing the allegations made in the FIR and the material produced by the investigating agency in the report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. and after hearing the counsel for the accused and the State.
6. Accordingly, finding no merit, the petition is dismissed.
(VIKAS BAHL) JUDGE September 06, 2023.
Davinder Kumar
Whether speaking / reasoned Yes/No
Whether reportable Yes/No
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:117296
6 of 6
::: Downloaded on - 19-09-2023 05:31:38 :::