Punjab-Haryana High Court
Labh Singh Sidhu vs State Of Punjab And Another on 25 April, 2013
Author: Sabina
Bench: Sabina
Criminal Misc.M No. 9144 of 2011 (O&M) 1
In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh
Date of decision:25.04.2013
Criminal Misc.M No. 9144 of 2011 (O&M)
Labh Singh Sidhu ...... Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab and another .......Respondents
Criminal Misc.M No.19659 of 2011 (O&M)
Harkirat Kaur and others ...... Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and another .......Respondents
Criminal Misc.M No.36704 of 2011 (O&M)
Dalbir Singh ...... Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab and another .......Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA
Present: Mr.Jagdish Manchanda,Advocate
for the petitioners.
Mr.J.S.Bhullar,Assistant Advocate
General, Punjab.
Mr.Hitesh Sood, Advocate for respondent No.2.
Mr.V.K.Sandhir,Advocate for respondent No.2
(in CRM.M No. 36704 of 2011)
****
Criminal Misc.M No. 9144 of 2011 (O&M) 2
SABINA, J.
Vide this order, the above mentioned three petitions would be disposed of as the petitioners have sought quashing of FIR No.381 dated 26.10.2010 under Sections 406/498-A/120B of the Indian Penal Code (Annexure P1) registered at Police Station Tripri Town,District Patiala along with all consequential proceedings arising thereto.
Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the complainant-Harpreet Kaur got married to Gurinder Singh Sidhu on 08.03.2009 at Chehal Palace, Patiala by way of Anand Karaj ceremony. Gurinder Singh Sidhu and his parents and his brother Gurtej Singh Sidhu, who were settled in Canada, returned back to Canada on 01.04.2009 and have not visited India thereafter. Gurtej Singh Sidhu sponsored the complainant and she reached Canada in November, 2009. Petitioner-Labh Singh, aged 85 years is the grand father of Gurinder Singh Sidhu and Dalbir Singh was the mediator with regard to the marriage of the complainant. They are residing in India. The complainant is residing in Canada. Complainant had visited India on 25.05.2010 for 15 days and had lodged the FIR in question. A son was born to the complainant out of the wedlock on 09.11.2010 in Canada. The divorce petition filed by the complainant was pending in Canada. Thus, the cause of action, if any, had arisen in Canda. Hence, continuation of criminal proceedings against the petitioners in India were nothing but an abuse of process of law.
Learned State counsel as well as counsel for respondent No.2, on the other hand, have opposed the petition. Criminal Misc.M No. 9144 of 2011 (O&M) 3
It has been held in State of Haryana vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 Supp(1) Supreme Court Cases 335, the Apex Court has held as under:-
"The following categories of cases can be stated by way of illustration wherein the extraordinary power under Article 226 or the inherent powers under Section 482,Cr.P.C. Can be exercised by the High Court either to prevent abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice, though it may not be possible to lay down any precise, clearly defined and sufficiently chennelised and inflexible guidelines or rigid formulae and to give an exhaustive list of myriad kinds of cases wherein such power should be exercised:-
(1)Where the allegations made in the first information report or the complainant, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused.
(2)Where the allegations in the first information report and other materials, if any, accompanying the FIR do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police officers under Section 156(1)of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of Section 155(2) of the Code.
(3)Where the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR or complaint and the evidence collected in support of the Criminal Misc.M No. 9144 of 2011 (O&M) 4 same do no disclose the commission of any offence and make out a case against the accused.
(4)Where, the allegations in the FIR do not constitute a cognizable offence but constitute only a non-cognizable offence, no investigation is permitted by a Police Officer without an order of Magistrate as contemplated under Section 155(2) of the Code.
(5)Where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused.
(6)Where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of the provisions of the Code or the concerned Act (under which a criminal proceeding is instituted) to the institution and continuance of the proceedings and/or where there is specific provision in the Code or the concerned Act, providing efficacious redress for the grievance of aggrieved party.
(7)Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide and/or where the proceedings is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge. We also give a note of caution to the effect that the power of quashing a criminal proceeding should be exercised very sparingly and with circumspection Criminal Misc.M No. 9144 of 2011 (O&M) 5 and that too in the rarest of rare cases; that the court will not be justified in embarking upon an enquiry as to the reliability or genuineness or otherwise of the allegations made in the FIR or the complaint and that the extraordinary or inherent powers do not confer an arbitrary jurisdiction on the court to act according to its whim or caprice."
In the present case, the marriage of the complainant was solemnized with Gurinder Singh Sidhu on 08.03.2009 at Patiala. Gurinder Singh Sidhu and his parents had came from Canada for marriage purposes. Gurinder Singh Sidhu had sent sponsorship of the complainant and, on the basis of the same, complainant had also reached Canada in November, 2009. A son was born to the complainant out of the wedlock on 09.11.2010, in Canada. It appears that some dispute had arisen between the parties and, apparently, due to this reason, the complainant has filed a divorce petition in Canada. Gurinder Singh Sidhu and his parents and his brother have not visited India since 01.04.2009. Thus, the cause of action, if any, had arisen in Canada. Litigation is pending between the complainant and her husband in Canada. Petitioner-Labh Singh is the grand father of Gurinder Singh Sidhu, whereas, Dalbir Singh had acted as a mediator at the time of marriage of the complainant. In the facts and circumstances of the present case, continuation of criminal proceedings would be nothing but an abuse of process of law.
Accordingly, these petitions are allowed. FIR No.381 dated 26.10.2010 under Sections 406/498-A/120-B IPC (Annexure Criminal Misc.M No. 9144 of 2011 (O&M) 6 P1) registered at Police Station Tripri Town, District Patiala and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom are quashed.
(SABINA) JUDGE April 25, 2013 arya