Punjab-Haryana High Court
Davinder Kumar vs State Of Punjab on 16 July, 2024
Author: Anoop Chitkara
Bench: Anoop Chitkara
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:089330
CRR-11-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRR-11-2024
Reserved on: 02.07.2024
Pronounced on: 16.07.2024
Davinder Kumar ......... Pe oner
Versus
State of Punjab ......... Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA
Present: Mr. Sandeep Kumar Bokalia, Advocate
for the pe oner.
Mr. Gurpartap Singh Bhullar, A.A.G., Punjab.
****
ANOOP CHITKARA, J. (ORAL)
1. On 06.05.2024, this Court had directed that this pe on shall be heard along with CRR-2886-2023 a1er hearing counsel for the par es. However, this pe on can be decided even without hearing the other pe on simultaneously, as such, this Court is confining only to the present pe on i.e. CRR-11-2024 and the order dated 06.05.2024 passed by this Court is recalled.
2. Aggrieved by the framing of charges under Sec on 477-A IPC by the Addi onal Sessions Judge on the ground that he had no jurisdic on to frame the charges, the pe oner has come up before this Court by filing the present criminal revision pe on.
3. The facts of the case are being taken from reply dated 18.04.2024 filed by the concerned Deputy Superintendent of Police. The case of the prosecu on is that the complainant Lajpat Rai Garg made a complaint dated 11.08.2017 informing about missing of the record of House Tax Branch, Municipal Council Jaitu. Subsequently, Execu ve Officer, Municipal Council, Jaitu reported the ma>er to the police vide le>er No.224 dated 15.06.2018. Upon this, vigilance enquiry was registered on 08.08.2020.
4. As per para 4 of the reply, no departmental ac on was taken regarding missing of the records and it is informed that the records of Municipal Council had vanished before the complaint.
5. It would be appropriate to refer relevant por on of para 5 of the reply dated 18.04.2024, which reads as follows;
5. "......The concerned clerk Gurinderpal Singh in his statement had disclosed that he got the charge of record from Davinder Kumar- pe oner without any wri ng and further gave the charge to clerk 1 of 3 ::: Downloaded on - 23-07-2024 01:35:15 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:089330 CRR-11-2024 Prem Chand without any wri ng with regard to handing over the charge. The present pe oner Davinder Kumar and Ram Chand clerk were deputed as clerk in property branch since 2010 to 2016, therea+er, Ramesh Kumar took the charge of record on 30.05.2017, Clerk Gurinderpal Singh from 02.06.2017 to 08.08.2017 and Prem Chand was posted as clerk in property branch from 08.08.2017 to year 2021."
6. As per para 7 of the reply, the inves gator found the complicity of another clerk Prem Chand, who was posted in the Property Branch from the period from 08.08.2017 ll year 2021 and as such he was also nominated as an accused. The ini al inves ga on was concluded on 14.12.2021 and challan was presented on 17.12.2021 and wai ng for sanc on. The trial Court discharged all the accused including pe oner for the offences under Sec on 13 (1-a) and (2) of PC Act and also for offences under Sec ons 409, 120-B IPC vide order dated 30.09.2023. However, learned Addi onal Sessions Judge was of the opinion that prima facie case under Sec on 477-A IPC was made out against the pe oner and sent him before the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Faridkot to face trial.
7. Counsel for the pe oner submits that the Sessions Court could not have framed charges under Sec on 477-A IPC because it had no jurisdic on.
8. On the contrary, State counsel submits that the Sessions Judge had already commi>ed the ma>er to Chief Judicial Magistrate, Faridkot because Sec on 477-A IPC was triable by the said Magistrate and as such, there is no illegality in the order.
9. It would be appropriate to extract the relevant por on of the impugned order dated 30.09.2023 passed in case No.SC/04/2021 by learned Addi onal Sessions Judge, Faridkot which reads as under:
"12.However, there are prima facie circumstances appearing against accused Devinder Kumar for making false entries or allega ons of omi1ng to make proper entries in the house tax or property tax registers of the Municipal Council, Jaitu with intent to defraud common ci zens and thus, a prima facie case under Sec on 477-A IPC is made out against him.
13. Let a charge sheet under Sec on 477-A IPC be framed against accused Devinder Kumar, Clerk, Municipal Council, Jaitu."
10. Pe oner's grievance is regarding para 13 wherein Special Judge, Faridkot had directed to frame the charges against the pe oner under Sec on 477-A IPC. 11 Needless to say that it was well within the legal domain of learned Addi onal Sessions Judge to discharge the accused for other offences and also to found opinion that prima facie case is made out for commission of offence under Sec on 477-A IPC. However, since he could 2 of 3 ::: Downloaded on - 23-07-2024 01:35:15 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:089330 CRR-11-2024 not have tried the pe oner (accused) for commission of offence under Sec on 477-A IPC, it would have been be>er in case, he had not used the words ("let a charge sheet under Sec on 477-A IPC be framed against accused Devinder Kumar, Clerk, Municipal Council, Jaitu") and frame charges.
12. Needless to say that it is for the concerned Judicial Magistrate to take a decision that whether in his opinion a prima facie case for framing of charges under Sec on 477-A IPC is made out or not. Given above, para 13 of the impugned order is modified with clarifica on that the concerned trial Court shall re-consider the evidence and form an opinion that whether evidence exists for framing of charges under Sec on 477-A IPC or not and shall not be influenced by the direc ons given in para 13 of the impugned order.
13. Given above, the present pe on is allowed and relevant por on of order (let a charge sheet under Sec on 477-A IPC be framed against accused Devinder Kumar, Clerk, Municipal Council, Jaitu) and charge sheet dated 30.09.2023 are set aside. Par es are directed to appear before the trial Court on or before 22.07.2024. It shall be permissible for the pe oner to raise the issues of maintainability of the police report in addi on to other points.
(ANOOP CHITKARA)
JUDGE
16.07.2024
Jyo -II
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether Reportable Yes/No
3 of 3
::: Downloaded on - 23-07-2024 01:35:15 :::