Punjab-Haryana High Court
Davinder Singh vs State Of Punjab on 5 September, 2012
Author: Naresh Kumar Sanghi
Bench: Naresh Kumar Sanghi
Criminal Misc. No.M-35177 of 2011 ..1..
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
Criminal Misc. No.M-35177 of 2011
Date of Decision : 5th September,2012
Davinder Singh
...Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab
...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARESH KUMAR SANGHI
Present: Mr.Sandeep S.Majithia, Advocate,
for the petitioner.
***
Naresh Kumar Sanghi, J.
Prayer in this petition is for quashing of FIR No.212 dated 03.09.2009, under Sections 419, 420 and 120-B, IPC, registered at Police Station, Division No.5, Civil Lines, Ludhiana, and the subsequent proceeding arising therefrom.
The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner along with his co-accused was booked for having committed the offences punishable under Sections 148, 307, 323, 336 and 506 read with Section 149, IPC and Section 25 of the Arms Act vide FIR No.60 dated 24.05.2009, Police Station, Dehlon, District Ludhiana. In that case, the petitioner and his co-accused were on bail. On one of the dates fixed in the above said case, one Gurbinder Singh appeared and got his presence marked as Malkiat Singh. When this fact came to the notice of the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Ludhiana, he conducted the preliminary inquiry and referred the matter to the police for registration of the case, on the basis of which, FIR No.220 dated Criminal Misc. No.M-35177 of 2011 ..2..
08.09.2009, under Sections 419, 420 and 120-B, IPC was registered at Police Station, Division No.5, Ludhiana. During the investigation and the inquiry held by the Magistrate, it came to the notice that Gurbinder Singh impersonated Malkiat Singh and put his signatures as such, at the asking of the petitioner. After investigation, the report under Section 173, Cr.P.C was submitted before the learned Area Magistrate for the prosecution of Gurbinder Singh, Manjit Singh and Malkiat Singh for the offences punishable under Sections 419, 420 and 120-B, IPC. Since the petitioner could not be arrested, therefore, he was placed in column no.2 of the report under Section 173, Cr.P.C.
Learned counsel contended that once the offence was committed during the course of court proceedings, in that eventuality, the only procedure available with the learned court below was to hold the inquiry in consonance with Section 340, Cr.P.C and thereafter, to file the complaint in the court of competent jurisdiction. He further submitted that the impugned FIR lodged by the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class was without jurisdiction and as such, is liable to be quashed.
I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and gone through the material available on record.
To effectively comprehend the controversy involved herein, it is desirable to reproduce Section 340, Cr.P.C, which reads as under:-
"340. Procedure in case mentioned in Section 195:
(1) When upon an application made to it in this behalf Criminal Misc. No.M-35177 of 2011 ..3..
or otherwise any court is of opinion that it is expedient in the interest of justice that an inquiry should be made into any offence referred to in clause (b) of sub section (1) of Section 195, which appears to have been committed in relation to a proceeding in that court or, as the case may be, in respect of a document produced or given in evidence in a proceeding in that court, such court may, after such preliminary inquiry, if any, as it thinks necessary;-
(a) record a finding to that effect.
(b) make a complaint thereof in writing;
(c) send it to a Magistrate of the first class having jurisdiction;
(d) take sufficient security for the appearance for the accused before such Magistrate, or if the alleged offence is non-bailable and the court thinks it necessary so to do send the accused in custody to such Magistrate; and
(e) bind over any person to appear and give evidence before such Magistrate.
(2) The power conferred on a court by sub-section (1) in respect of an offence may, in any case where that court has neither made a complaint under sub-section (1) in respect of that offence nor rejected an application for the making of such complaint, be exercised by the court to which such former court is subordinate within the meaning of sub-section (4) of section 195.
(3) A complaint made under this section shall be signed;-
(a) where the court making the complaint is a High Court, by such officer of the court as the court may appoint.
(b) in any other case, by the presiding officer of the court or by such officer of the Court as the court may Criminal Misc. No.M-35177 of 2011 ..4..
authorise in writing in this behalf. (4) In this Section, "court" has the same meaning as in section 195."
Perusal of the above section reveals that the inquiry referred to in the said Section has to be made only when the offence has been committed as referred to in Clause (b) of sub- section (1) of Section 195, Cr.P.C, which is reproduced below:-
"(b) (i) Of any offence punishable under any of the following sections of the Indian Penal Code (45 to 1860), namely, sections 193 to 196 (both inclusive), 199, 200, 205 to 211 (both inclusive) and 228, when such offence is alleged to have been committed in, or in relation to, any proceeding in any court, of
(ii) Of any offence described in section 463, or punishable under section 471, section 475 or section 476, of the said Code, when such offence is alleged to have been committed in respect of a document produced or given in evidence in a proceeding in any court, or
(iii) Of any criminal conspiracy to commit, or attempt to commit, or the abetment of, any offence specified in sub-clause (i) or sub-clause (ii), except on the complaint in writing of that Court or by such officer of the Court as that Court may authorise in writing in this behalf, or of some other Court to which that Court is subordinate."
Perusal of the above statutory provisions clearly indicates that if the offences punishable under Sections 193 to 196 (both inclusive), 199, 200, 205 to 211 (both inclusive) and 228, IPC, are alleged to have been committed in, or in relation to, any proceedings in any court, or any offence described in Criminal Misc. No.M-35177 of 2011 ..5..
Section 463, or punishable under Sections 471, 475, or Section 476, IPC, when such offence alleged to have been committed in respect of a document produced or given in evidence in a proceeding in any court, or any criminal conspiracy to commit, or attempt to commit, or the abetment of, any offence specified herein above, no court shall take cognizance except on the complaint in writing of that court or by such officer of the court as that court may authorise in writing in that behalf or to some other court to which that court is subordinate.
The impugned FIR has been registered for commission of the offences punishable under Sections 419, 420 and 120-B, IPC which are not described in Section 195, Cr.P.C, therefore, the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner that the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class in whose court the alleged offences were committed was not competent to lodge the First Information Report, is not tenable.
Therefore, finding no force in the present petition, the same is hereby dismissed.
September 05, 2012 (Naresh Kumar Sanghi) seema Judge