MANJIT SINGH ALIAS BITU Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners seek quashing of FIR No. 139 dated 18.6.2001 registered under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 120-B, 457, 380 and 506 I.P.C. with Police Station Banga, District Nawanshahar and the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom in view of the compromise arrived at between the parties.

(2.) THE present case was registered at the instance of Avinash Kaur, Principal of the Model Public Senior Secondary School, Kajla Road, Banga. According to the allegation made Manjit Singh alias Bitu resident of Village Khanpur was employed as a driver in the school for the last two years. In addition, he used to do the office work such as depositing of school provident fund etc. into the bank. The complainant is stated to have given him money for purchasing Enfield Motorcycle bearing registration No. PB-32-5871. Manjit Singh got the registration of the aforesaid motorcycle in his own name by giving the school address and thereby committed fraud on the complainant. On 2.6.2001, the complainant also came to know that Manjit Singh and another Clerk-Vinod Kumar had illicit relations with Arvinder Bedi and Harvinder Pal Kaur, lady teachers and they had also made a complaint against them. The complainant thereafter turned them out of the school. Manjit Singh, while standing on the road side in front of the school called her bad names and further threatened to cause damage to the school. On the same day at about 2.00 p.m. both Manjit Singh and Vinod Kumar threatened to liquidate the complainant. On 7.6.2001, Manjit Singh and Vinod Kumar came to the school premises and called her bad names. The report was also made to the Panchayat of the Village and Police Station, Banga. Besides Nazar Singh and Balwinder Kaur uncle and cousin of Manjit Singh respectively were informed. At about 7.00 p.m. on the same day number of villagers, namely, Mohinder Singh, Lamberdar of Village Kalera, Nazar Singh, Charan Singh and Balwinder Singh came to meet the complainant and in their presence Manjit Singh begged pardon from her. He handed over the motorcycle and mobile phone to the complainant. He had also taken all the articles belonging to him. He had also furnished an affidavit for transfer of the registration of the motor cycle in her name but did not do so till 14.6.2001. Thereafter, on 14.6.2001, when the complainant along with her family members had gone to Manikaran, the motorcycle was parked inside the house. When she returned to the house on 18.6.2001, she found that colour T.V. mark Texla, White Piano type phone, Dishes and Gas Cylinder of Indian Oil Company stolen. She was informed by her servant that these articles had been forcibly taken by Manjit Singh and Vinod Kumar who were accompanied by two persons with explosive type material and sword (Kirpan). They had also asked the servant to leave the place immediately otherwise he will be liquidated. The investigation of the case was taken up.

(3.) IT has been strenuously urged by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the case was got registered by respondent No. 2 under some wrong impression and due to undue influence of other staff members of the school but later on due to the intervention of the respectables of the locality, the parties, have effected a compromise, copy of which is Annexure-P.2. Consequently, it was prayed that the FIR in question be quashed.