Punjab-Haryana High Court
Gurpal Singh & Anr vs State Of Punjab & Ors on 28 August, 2012
Author: Surya Kant
Bench: Surya Kant
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB
AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.
Crl. Misc. No. 49473-M of 2007.
Date of Decision: 28th August, 2012.
Gurpal Singh & Anr. Petitioners through
Mr. Vikram Chaudhary, Advocate
Versus
State of Punjab & Ors. Respondents through
Ms. Monica Chhibbar Sharma, DAG, Punjab, for respondent No.1.
Mr. ADS Sukhija, Advocate with Shri G.S.Pannu, Advocate, for respondents No. 2 and 3.
CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.P.NAGRATH
1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? SURYA KANT, J. [ORAL] In this petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which has been referred to a larger Bench along with some connected cases but on the joint request made by the parties it has been segregated from the other cases, the petitioners seek quashing of FIR No. 65 dated 01.04.2004 registered under Sections 406/409/34 IPC at Police Station, Sadar Malout, District Muktsar; challan dated 21.07.2004 presented under Section 173 Cr.P.C. as well as subsequent proceedings arising there-from. [2]. The allegations against the petitioners in the FIR are that the respondent Corporation entrusted paddy for customed milling during the crop year 2000-01 but the petitioners being Directors of M/s S.S.Cotton Mills Private Limited did not entrust customed milled rice weighing 23,269 quintals causing a loss to the tune of Rs.35,20,705/- to the respondent Corporation. [3]. The investigation was made, report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. was submitted and upon framing of charges, the petitioners are facing trial before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Muktsar. [4]. The petitioners though initially challenged the above stated criminal proceedings on various grounds including that the dispute is of 'civil nature' in relation to which arbitration proceedings could be initiated by the Corporation and after referring to some court decisions on the point, this Court vide order dated 19.10.2007 directed that the proceedings before the trial Court may go on but final order shall not be passed.
[5]. The petitioners, however, during the pendency of this petition, decided to settle the matter with the Corporation and have paid the entire due amount along with interest to the respondent Corporation. This fact is duly acknowledged by respondent No. 3 - District Manager of the respondent Corporation at Muktsar vide his affidavit dated 09.08.2012.
[6]. The District Manager of the respondent Corporation at Muktsar has further corroborated the contents of his affidavit dated 09.08.2012 by making a statement on oath today, reiterating that the entire due amount has been paid by the petitioners and nothing is recoverable from them. Similarly, he has deposed that the Corporation has no objection if the criminal proceedings initiated by it are quashed in the light of the above-stated subsequent events. [7]. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, who are ad- idem in support of the prayer made in this petition and after going through the principles laid down by a Five Judges Bench of this Court in Kulwinder Singh v State of Punjab, 2007[3] RCR [Criminal], 1052 and also keeping in view the nature of dispute involved in this case, namely, non-payment of outstanding dues on account of the default of the Rice Mill in not returning the due quantity of customed milled rice proportionate to the paddy allocated to it in the KMP 2000- 01, we are of the considered view that continuation of the criminal proceedings would be an exercise in futility and no useful purpose shall be achieved.
[8]. In view of the compromise arrived at between the petitioners and the complainant - Corporation, as noticed above, we need not dwell-upon the other legal issues raised by the petitioners in this petition.
[9]. Consequently, we allow this petition and quash FIR No. 65 dated 01.04.2004, registered under Sections 406/409/34 IPC at Police Station, Sadar Malout, District Muktsar; challan dated 21.07.2004 presented under Section 173 Cr.P.C. as well as subsequent proceedings arising there-from.
[10]. Disposed of. Dasti.
( SURYA KANT )
JUDGE
August 28, 2012. ( R.P.NAGRATH)
dinesh JUDGE