Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

3. The matter was then investigated at a high level. It was first looked into and investigated by D.S.P. Raj Kishan Bedi, and then by D.S.P. Yashpal. The case was thus filed due to lack of any evidence which would show any involvement or liability of the petitioner. The case was then put up untraced by Shri Gurdev Singh, the then S.H.O. Police Station Division No. 4, Jalandhar on 26-4-1990. Even thereafter the matter was thoroughly inquired into by the then S. P. (Detective) Harinder Singh Ghanal and by another Superintendent of Police. Thereafter the petitioner was promoted as D.S.P. on 21-5-1992. Thereafter Shri Dinkar Gupta (respondent No. 2), S. S. P. Jalandhar, became inimical towards the petitioner. The background is the false involvement of the petitioner's wife, son and daughter-in-law at the instance of one Sushma Sharma -- a tenant in the house of petitioner's son. The F.I.R. was registered under political pressure. The petitioner met respondent No. 2 in his office to seek justice. However, respondent No. 2 misbehaved with the petitioner and even went to the extent of abusing him. The petitioner was physically pushed out of the office at the instance of respondent No. 2. The petitioner could not tolerate the insult hurled upon him in the presence of his relatives on 28-2-1996. He served a legal notice to this effect upon respondent No. 2 on 29-2-1996. Thecriminal case registered against the family members of the petitioner stands concluded and the accused therein have been acquitted by the concerned trial Court. Thereafter, the petitioner filed complaint against respondent No. 2 in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jalandhar on 20-3-1996 under Sections 355, 500, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code. He filed another suit for the recovery of the damages to the tune of Rs. 2 lacs on 20-3-1996. Thereafter the petitioner was threatened and intimidated by various persons at the instance of respondent No. 2. A complaint was also submitted by the petitioner to the higher authorities, including the Chief Justice of this Court, and to the Governor of Punjab, and the Director General of Police, Punjab. The petitioner alleges that in order to settle the score with the petitioner, respondent No. 2 revived the case set out in the F.I.R. (Annexure P1), and without there being any incriminating evidence against the petitioner, a challan was presented against him on 11 -6-1996, under Sections 420/466/468/471, Indian Penal Code. Thus, according to the petitioner, the challan has been filed for extraneous reasons. The petitioner has sought the quashment of the F.I.R. and the submission of the Police Report on the ground that he never misrepresented the facts to the Department at the time of the joining of the service; that the filing of the challan is an abuse of the process of the Court; that there is an inordinate delay on the part of the respondents in the lodging of the F.I.R. as well as in the submission of the challan and that there is an unexcusable mala fide allegedly committed on behalf of respondent No. 2.