SUMEET SOFAT Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is for quashing of Kalandra No. 15 dated 20.10.2009, under Sections 182, 211 IPC (Annexure P -3), presented by respondent No. 2 -Deputy Commissioner of Police, Ludhiana, before the Illaqa Magistrate. The petitioner moved an application/complaint dated 25.05.2009 before the Senior Superintendent of Police, Ludhiana (City) against Ramesh Kumar Pashan, Abhinav Pashan, dinayak Pashan and two other unidentified persons, stating therein that there was dispute between him and the Pashan family since the last four years and cases were pending in the Courts. They wanted to kill him and his family members. Many times, threats were also given to him in that regard. On 23.05.2009, the members of Pashan family along with some unidentified persons had attacked him with iron rods and kirpans. They also put red chilli powder in his eyes. During this incident, he suffered multiple injuries, including hairline fracture in left wrist. An attempt to kidnap the petitioner was also made. As such, he sought registration of an FIR against the aforesaid persons. Petitioner also moved a private complaint before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ludhiana, on 01.05.2010, in which notice was issued to the SHO concerned and the said complaint is still pending in the Court. The petitioner also filed Crl. Misc. No. M -6743 of 2010 before this Court for issuance of directions to the State as well as DGP, Punjab, to take action against the official respondents for failing to register a case against the accused and their unknown accomplices. The said petition was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 29.11.2011 with liberty to the petitioner to avail alternative remedy before the Magistrate. In the meantime, the petitioner learnt that Kalandra under Sections 182 and 211 IPC has been registered against him by respondent No. 2 -Deputy Commissioner of Police, Ludhiana.

(2.) THE precise grievance of the petitioner is that without registering the case and without investigating the matter as per law, the Kalandra could not be instituted against him and continuation of such proceedings are contrary to the provisions of Section 154 Cr.P.C.

(3.) INITIALLY , a gunman was provided to the petitioner for his protection, but subsequently due to administrative reasons, he was withdrawn.