GURMAIL SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been filed under Sec. 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR No.236 dated 15.09.2021 (Annexure P-1), under Ss. 384, 511 and 506 IPC, registered at Police Station Lehra,

(2.) The FIR in the present case has been registered on 15.09.2021, on the statement of respondent No.2 Jagdeep Singh/complainant, as per which, the occurrence has been stated to have taken place during the period starting from 10.10.2019 to 15.09.2021. In his statement, the complainant has alleged that the petitioner was having enmity against father of the complainant since 2008 and the petitioner in connivance with his accomplices, had got registered a false rape case against the complainant in the year 2019, so that he could blackmail the complainant and could take Rs.14 lakhs from the complainant and could take revenge on account of his enmity and in the said FIR, the SHO and Superintendent of Police had declared the complainant innocent. It is further alleged that as per the enquiry report of the police officials, the petitioner got the said false case registered against the complainant for taking Rs.14 lakhs from the complainant. It is further alleged that in the year 2020, Gurjit Singh had told the complainant that one girl 'S' (name withheld) was demanding money by blackmailing the said Gurjit Singh and the complainant being an advocate, advised Gurjit Singh to get a case registered against the said girl 'S' and as per the advice given by the complainant, the said Gurjit Singh got a case registered under Sec. 384 IPC against 'S' and it was the petitioner who helped 'S' in getting bail and then provoked 'S' to register a false case against the complainant, but said 'S' refused to do so and got registered the rape case i.e. case 307/2020, only against Gurjit Singh, which was subsequently cancelled as the same was found to be false. It is further alleged that now, the petitioner, in connivance with wrong persons, is demanding Rs.14 lakhs from the complainant and has threatened that in case, the said amount is not paid, then a false rape case will again be registered against the complainant. On the basis of the said complaint and allegations, the present FIR under Ss. 384, 511 and 506 IPC has been registered.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the registration of the present FIR is a complete abuse of the process of the Court. It is submitted that the FIR in question can be divided into two parts. The first part pertaining to the allegations with respect to the rape case filed in the year 2019 by 'R' (name withheld) against Gupreet Singh @ Goldy, Jagdeep Singh son of Najar Singh and Respondent No.2/Complainant and in the second part, the allegations pertain to the year 2020 involving Gurjit Singh and the second girl 'S' (name withheld) as per which, the Petitioner in connivance with other persons had been demanding Rs. 14 lakhs from Respondent No.2/complainant failing which, the petitioner would get another false case registered against respondent no.2/complainant. It is argued that even a perusal of the FIR would show that the period during which the alleged offences have been committed is from 10/10/2019 to 15/9/2020. Reference has been made to Annexure P-2, which is an FIR bearing No.263 dtd. 10/10/2019, registered under Sec. 376, 342, 506 and 120-B IPC and Sec. 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offence Act, 2012 which was registered at the instance of one girl 'R' (name withheld) and in the said case, the respondent no.2/complainant was also made an accused in addition to Gurpreet Singh @ Goldy and Jagdeep Singh son of Najar Singh. It is stated that the first part of the present FIR relates to the said FIR No.263 dated 10.10.2019 and with respect to the same, it is submitted that the complainant-respondent No.2 had filed an application dtd. 7/7/2020 in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Moonak against the said girl 'R', the present petitioner as well as three other persons. The said application has been annexed as Annexure P-5 along with the present petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to the said application and has specifically highlighted the allegations made at page Nos.54, 58 and 59 of the paper-book with respect to the allegations of the alleged demand of Rs.14 lakhs by the present petitioner and the false implication of the complainant by the petitioner in the said rape case. Reference has also been made to the prayer clause to show that a prayer was made to register a case under Ss. 211, 193, 389 and 120-B IPC. It is submitted that the said case had come up before the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Moonak on 20/7/2020, on which date, the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Moonak observed that the Court was of the opinion that the facts disclosed in the application did not warrant registration of the FIR and treated the application under Sec. 156(3) as a criminal complaint and adjourned the same to 21.08.2020 for pre-summoning evidence. It is further submitted that the said girl 'R' (name withheld) appeared in the witness box as PW-1 in the FIR No.263 on 17.08.2021 and made specific allegations against respondent No.2 and on the basis of the said allegations, an application dated 24.08.2021 under Sec. 319 Cr.P.C. for summoning of respondent No.2 as an accused was filed. It is argued that without disclosing the factum of the filing the application under Sec. 156(3) Cr.P.C. as well as the order dated 20.07.2020, respondent No.2 has got the present FIR registered. The same is stated to be an act of active concealment and abuse of the process of the Court on part of the respondent No.2. It is also submitted that once the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Moonak had observed that the application under Sec. 156(3) did not warrant registration of the FIR and the allegations made in the said application under Sec. 156(3) Cr.P.C. were similar to the allegations made in the first part of the FIR, then, it was not for the police officials to act in violation of the orders passed by the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Moonak and register the present FIR. It is submitted that the complainant/respondent No.2 by getting the present FIR registered has in fact tried to nullify the order dtd. 20/7/2020 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Moonak, without even challenging the said order before a higher forum.In order to complete the chain of events with respect to the first part, learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that after registration of the present case, respondent No.2 had withdrawn the said complaint under Sec. 156(3) Cr.P.C. and for the said purpose, he has referred to the order dated 11.12.2021 (Annexure P-11), at page 216 of the paperbook. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that the allegations in the FIR with respect to the fact that respondent No.2 was implicated in a false case in the year 2019 and was exonerated by the police, cannot even remotely stand, on account of the fact that respondent No.2 has been summoned under Sec. 319 Cr.P.C. vide order dated 01.12.2021 passed by the Sessions Judge, Sangrur and the said order has been annexed with the paperbook as Annexure P-9. Paragraph 8 of the said order would show that respondent No.2 has been summoned to face trial under Ss. 363, 376(D) and 384 of the IPC along with the other accused persons for 23/12/2021.