Punjab-Haryana High Court
Jaswinder Singh vs State Of Punjab And Another on 31 October, 2025
Author: Jasjit Singh Bedi
Bench: Jasjit Singh Bedi
CRM-M-40029-2021 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-40029-2021
Date of Decision:-31.10.2025
JASWINDER SINGH
......Petitioner
VERSUS
STATE OF PUNJAB & ANOTHER
......Respondents
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI
Present:- Mr. Sarju Puri, Sr. Advocate with
Ms. Navyug Geet Brar, Advocate and
Mr. Digvijay Manchanda, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. Vaneesh Rai, DAG, Punjab.
***
JASJIT SINGH BEDI, J.
The prayer in this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is for the quashing of FIR No.68 dated 06.07.2013 (Annexure P-1) registered under Sections 353, 186, 332, 148, 149 IPC and Section 3 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 at Police Station Sadar Nawanshahr, District SBS Nagar along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom.
2. The brief facts of the case are that an FIR No.68 dated 06.07.2013 (Annexure P-1) under Sections 353, 186, 332, 148, 149 IPC and Section 3 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 Police Station Sadar Nawanshahr, District SBS Nagar came to be registered at the instance of respondent No.2-ASI Surinder Pal with the allegations that in order to prevent a fight between the workers of two political parties, when 1 of 7 ::: Downloaded on - 14-11-2025 01:53:53 ::: CRM-M-40029-2021 -2- the police party reached at Village Bhan Majra 20/25 unknown persons attacked him and his fellow police officials with Dangs and Kirpans in which attack the police official vehicles also suffered damage and he and his companions suffered injury thereby causing obstruction in the performance of their official duties etc. The copy of the FIR No.68 dated 06.07.2013 is attached as Annexure P-1 to the petition.
3. The aforementioned FIR was registered against unknown persons. During the course of the investigation, the report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. was submitted against 21 persons.
4. Eighteen accused faced trial and were acquitted vide judgment dated 15.07.2019 (Annexure P-3) passed by the JMIC, SBS Nagar. One accused namely, Tirath Singh was tried and was acquitted vide judgment dated 02.12.2022 passed by the JMIC, SBS Nagar (Annexure P-5). One accused namely, Kashmiri Lal S/o Karta Ram died after passing of the judgment dated 15.07.2019 (Annexure P-3).
5. The present petitioner was declared a proclaimed person on 11.01.2016 which order came to be set aside by this Court vide order dated 08.02.2022 (Annexure P-4).
6. The present petition has been filed seeking quashing of the FIR No.68 dated 06.07.2013 (Annexure P-1) along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom primarily on the grounds that the identically situated co-accused of the petitioner have been acquitted and there is absolutely no possibility of any fresh evidence coming up against the petitioner.
2 of 7 ::: Downloaded on - 14-11-2025 01:53:54 ::: CRM-M-40029-2021 -3-
7. The learned Senior counsel for the petitioner contends that none of the accused was named in the FIR. All the accused were nominated as such when the report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. was presented in Court. The statements of various prosecution witnesses would show that they were unaware of the identity of the accused including the petitioner. PW4-Tara Singh, PW5-Makhan Singh, PW6-Tara Singh, PW7-Chaman Singh, PW8- Balwinder Singh and PW9-Major Singh have not supported the case of the prosecution. No test identification parade has been held and the identification of the accused was done by the Investigating Officer with the help of photographs of different persons. In fact, the accused came to know about the FIR after the challan was presented in Court against them. The petitioner was declared a proclaimed person on 11.01.2016 which order stands quashed by this Court in CRM-M-39903-2021 on 08.02.2022 (Annexure P-4). As all the co-accused of the petitioner stand acquitted and there is no likelihood of any fresh evidence coming up against the petitioner, the continuation of the trial would be in exercise in futility and therefore, the FIR No.68 dated 06.07.2013 (Annexure P-1) under Sections 353, 186, 332, 148, 149 IPC and Section 3 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 Police Station Sadar Nawanshahr, District SBS Nagar along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom are liable to be quashed.
8. On the other hand, the learned State counsel while not disputing the factual aspects of the matter contends that the petitioner cannot derive any benefit from the judgments of acquittal of his co-accused and he is liable to face trial for the charges framed against him particularly in the context 3 of 7 ::: Downloaded on - 14-11-2025 01:53:54 ::: CRM-M-40029-2021 -4- that he was declared a proclaimed person. However, it is not denied that the order whereby the petitioner was declared a proclaimed person has been set aside.
9. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.
10. Admittedly, no accused is named in the FIR. All the accused came to be nominated when the final report was submitted against them. The statements of the various witnesses would show that the identity of the accused was not known. No test identification parade was conducted and the accused were identified by the Investigating Officer based on photographs. It appears that the accused came to know about the case only after the challan was presented against them. Multiple witnesses have turned hostile. Quite apparently, in view of the evidence led and the judgments of acquittal passed in the case of the co-accused, there is absolutely no possibility of any evidence coming up against the petitioner nor is there any likelihood of conviction. In fact, the holding of a trial in the instant case would be nothing but an abuse of the process of the Court. As regards the petitioner being declared a proclaimed person, the said order has been quashed by this Court vide order dated 08.02.2022 (Annexure P-4).
11. This Court in the case of Sudo Mandal @ Diwarak Mandal Vs. State of Punjab, 2011(2) RCR (Criminal) 453 held as under:-
"22. While disposing of these two appeals, we are very much concerned about the absconding village rustic accused namely Radha Mandal, Rajiya Mandal and Sambodh Mandal, who had successfully evaded the dragnet of the police. The Investigating agency has put up a case implanting eye witnesses as against all the 4 of 7 ::: Downloaded on - 14-11-2025 01:53:54 ::: CRM-M-40029-2021 -5- accused. Both the eye witnesses projected by the prosecution had not passed the test of trustworthiness. Their own showing would go to establish without any pale of doubt that they could not have witnessed the occurrence. The other materials produced by the prosecution also did not advance the case of the prosecution any further. The above facts and circumstances have persuaded us to come to a definite conclusion that the accused in this case were not the perpetrators of crime of murder as alleged by the prosecution. The same set of materials would be produced before the Sessions Court on production of the remaining three accused namely Radha Mandal, Rajiya Mandal and Sambodh Mandal. After all the poor innocent labourers had migrated to other places to eke out their livelihood. The appellants herein had in fact suffered imprisonment for such a long time leaving behind their kith and kin, who might have been in dire need of financial support and help from them. Such an unpleasant situation shall not be created for the other three accused against whom also there is no material on record to fasten them with the charge of murder. We seriously pondered over rendering judicial succour to those faceless and voiceless accused who had taken to heals and hidden themselves apprehending the wrath of criminal proceedings for the heinous crime of murder. We are convinced that our judicial arm is not so crippled as to betray the vague hope of the hopeless.
23. We are conscious of the fact situation that those three accused namely Radha Mandal, Rajiya Mandal and Sambodh Mandal had absconded and were declared as proclaimed offenders. They had not faced the trial, but when we find that no case could be made out as against them also with the very same rickety materials, those accused also will have to be relieved of the impending pain of facing the prosecution for murder. Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure reads as follows :-
"Saving of inherent powers of High Court. Nothing in this Code shall be deemed to limit or affect the inherent powers of the 5 of 7 ::: Downloaded on - 14-11-2025 01:53:54 ::: CRM-M-40029-2021 -6- High Court to make such orders as may be necessary to give effect to any order under this Code, or to prevent abuse of the process of any Court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice."
24. The above provisions recognise the inherent powers of the Court to do real and substantial justice, preventing the abuse of the process of the Court. The statutory recognition of the inherent jurisdiction of the criminal Court indicates that there is a power for the criminal Courts to make such an order as may be necessary to meet the ends of justice. We are conscious of the fact that the powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure are to be exercised very sparingly and in exceptional cases where abuse of the process of the Court would result in serious miscarriage of justice. The inherent powers of the Court should not be exercised to stifle legitimate prosecution. But at any rate the settled position is that this Court has the jurisdiction to quash the entire criminal proceedings to prevent the abuse of the process of the Court in order to secure the ends of justice. In our considered view the same inherent powers can be exercised when this Court finds that the innocent accused, who had absconded would simply face the empty formality of trial with the very same unbelievable and untrustworthy evidence, which would ultimately lead to their acquittal. Bringing the absconding accused to face the trial in this case in the above facts and circumstances would amount to abuse of the process of the Court. To secure the ends of justice, we hereby quash the entire proceedings as against the absconding accused namely Radha Mandal, Rajiya Mandal and Sambodh Mandal pending before Judicial Magistrate Ist Class,Bathinda/Sessions Judge, Bathinda, as no useful purpose will be served even if they are procured and ordered to face the trial in this case."
(Emphasis supplied)
12. In view of the aforementioned discussion and the judgment rendered in Sudo Mandal (supra), I find considerable merit in the present 6 of 7 ::: Downloaded on - 14-11-2025 01:53:54 ::: CRM-M-40029-2021 -7- petition. Therefore, the FIR No.68 dated 06.07.2013 (Annexure P-1) registered under Sections 353, 186, 332, 148, 149 IPC and Section 3 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 at Police Station Sadar Nawanshahr, District SBS Nagar along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom stand quashed qua the petitioner.
( JASJIT SINGH BEDI )
JUDGE
31.10.2025
JITESH
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether reportable Yes/No
7 of 7
::: Downloaded on - 14-11-2025 01:53:54 :::