Punjab-Haryana High Court
Inderjeet Singh vs State Of Punjab on 17 January, 2013
Author: Sabina
Bench: Sabina
Crl. Revision No. 3872 of 2012 (O&M) -1-
In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh
Crl. Revision No. 3872 of 2012 (O&M)
Date of decision: 17.1.2013
Inderjeet Singh ......Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab .......Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA
Present: Mr. P.S.Ahluwalia, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. K.D.S.Sidhu, Addl. A.G., Punjab.
****
SABINA, J.
Petitioner has filed this petitioner under Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure ('Cr.P.C.' for short) challenging the order dated 14.9.2012 whereby the permission to withdraw the prosecution was declined by the Trial Court.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that as per notification Annexure P-3 it had been decided by the Government to issue directions to all the District Magistrates for withdrawal of Court cases registered prior to the amendments carried out in the order i.e. The Punjab Regulation of Compounded Cattle Feed, Concentrates and Mineral Mixtures Order, 1988 ('Order' for short) vide notification dated 14.8.1996. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that the FIR in the present case was registered in the year 1989 and, hence, in view of Annexure P-3, order Annexure P-5 was passed Crl. Revision No. 3872 of 2012 (O&M) -2- that the competent authority be directed to withdraw the cases in view of Annexure P-3. Prosecution had moved an application for permission to withdraw the prosecution against the petitioner. The Trial Court had erred in dismissing the application.
Learned State counsel has also supported the case of the petitioner.
In the present case, FIR in question was registered on 31.5.1989 under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 at Police Station City Khanna, District Ludhiana against the petitioner. As per Annexure P-3, it was requested by the State that directions be issued to all the District Magistrates for withdrawal of Court cases registered prior to the amendments carried out in the order vide notification dated 14.8.1996.
Annexure P-3 reads as under:-
"Government of Punjab Dairy Development Department (Animal Husbandry Branch)"
Sub: Withdrawal of court cases registered under the Punjab Regulation of Compounded Cattle Feed, Concentrates and Mineral Mixtures Order, 1988. Principal Secretary to Govt. Punjab Department of Home Affairs and Justice may kindly refer to the subject cited.
2. It is intimated that under Section 3 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, Punjab State have promulgated an order. "The Punjab Regulation of Crl. Revision No. 3872 of 2012 (O&M) -3- Compounded Cattle Feed, Concentrates and Mineral Mixtures Order, 1988". Under the provisions of the said Order may court cases have been registered against the defaulter in the various Courts of the state.
3. The Punjab Cattle Feed Manufacturers Association in the month of December, 1994 submitted a memorandum to the then Chief Minister, Punjab for staying police action and also requested for making necessary amendments in the said Order and after obtaining the prerequisite approval of the Govt. of India vide Notification dated 14.8.1996 (copy enclosed) a new clause 12-A has been incorporated in the said Order. In view of this it is requested that necessary directions to all the District Magistrates be issued for withdrawal of Court cases registered prior to the amendments carried out in the said Order vide Notification dated 14.8.1996.
Sd/-
Joint Secretary to Govt. Punjab Animal Husbandry, Fisheries and Diary Development Department."
The prosecution moved an application before the Trial Court under Section 321 Cr.P.C. for withdrawal of the case against the petitioner. The Trial Court has dismissed the application on the ground that the requisite order passed by the State for withdrawal of case had not been placed on record. Further no reasons had been given as to why withdrawal of the prosecution was necessary.
Crl. Revision No. 3872 of 2012 (O&M) -4-
Section 321 Cr.P.C. reads as under:-
"Withdrawal from prosecution-
The Public Prosecutor or Assistant Public Prosecutor in charge of a case may, with the consent of the Court, at any time before the judgment is pronounced, withdraw from the prosecution of any person either generally or in respect of any one or more of the offences for which he is tried; and, upon such withdrawal,-
(a) if it is made before a charge has been framed, the accused shall be discharged in respect of such offence or offences;
(b) if it is made after a charge has been framed, or when under this Code no charge is required, he shall be acquitted in respect of such offence or offences:
Provided that where such offence-
(i) was against any law relating to a matter to which the executive power of the Union extends, or
(ii) was investigated by the Delhi Special Police Establishment under the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 (25 of 1946 ), or
(iii) involved the misappropriation or destruction of, or damage to, any property belonging to the Central Government, or
(iv) was committed by a person in the service of the Central Government while acting or purporting to act in the discharge of his official duty, and the prosecutor in charge of the case has hot been appointed by the Central Government he shall not, unless he has been permitted Crl. Revision No. 3872 of 2012 (O&M) -5- by the Central Government to do so, move the Court for its consent to withdraw from the prosecution and the Court shall, before according consent, direct the Prosecutor to produce before it the permission granted by the Central Government to withdraw from the prosecution.
Thus, as per the above provision, the Public Prosecutor or the Assistant Public Prosecutor who is the incharge of the case can approach the Court for withdrawal from prosecution of the accused.
In the present case, the Additional Public Prosecutor for the State had moved an application for withdrawal from prosecution of the petitioner on the basis of Annexure P-3. In the facts and circumstances of the present case, the learned Trial Court should have allowed the application moved by the prosecution under Section 321 Cr.P.C. The state had taken a decision that all the Court cases registered prior to the amendment carried out in the order be withdrawn vide notification dated 14.8.1996.
Accordingly, this petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 14.9.2012 (Annexure P-1) is set aside. Consequently, the application moved by the prosecution under Section 321 Cr.P.C. seeking permission to withdraw the prosecution against the petitioner is allowed.
(SABINA) JUDGE January 17, 2013 Gurpreet