SUKHMINDER SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Sukhminder Singh, ASI by means of this petition under Section 482 Cr. P.C. seeks quashing of complaint No. 56 dated April 15, 1986 filed by Gautam K. Handa respondent No. 2 (hereinafter referred to as the complainant.)

(2.) The petitioner is being prosecuted along with Sh. Chand Ahuja and Lalit Ahuja for of fences under sections 385, 392 and 504 I.P.C. The facts on the basis of which the petition is being prosecuted may be briefly summarised: Chand Ahuja who is a partner with M/s. Milkh Raj Madan Mohan, CommissionT Agents, Bank Street Bhatinda, lodged a false report with the police leading to the registration of case F.I.R. No. 262 for offence under Section 406/420 I.P.C. Police Station Kotwali Bhatinda and is dated October 31, 1985. S/Sh. G.R Hada, RK. Sharma and P .K. Gupta were named as the accused. On December 9, 1985, a police party headed by the petitioner and accompanied by Chand Ahuja. Lalit Ahuja and others visited the premises of M/s. Rarna Fibres Limited New Delhi. The petitioner arrested Anil Hada and RK. Gupta and tried to trace G.R Hada and R.K. Sharma and a number of other persons on the plea that there were warrants of arrest against them: Chand Ahuja in the presence of his co-accused made a demand for Rs. 5.35 lacs for setting the case and gave out a threat that in the alternative the police will the Anil Hada and RK. Gupta to Punjab. The accused persons also threatened the complainant and asked him to pay the demanded money on the allegation that the complainant was also responsible for the control of the affairs of the company. The petitioner directed the complainant to pay the required amount or otherwise he would arrest all of them against non-bailable warrants. Under the threat of arrest and humiliation, the complainant arranged a draft of Rs. 3.5 lacs from, the account of M/s Hada Leasing and Industries Limited in favour of M/s. Milkh Raj Madan Mohan. The police in the meantime obtained a transit remand of Anil Hada and RK. Gupta for producing them in the Court at Bhatinda. Chand Ahuja made a demand for handing over the draft and gave the promise that no police remand shall be sought and Anil Hada and RK. Gupta shall be released on reaching Bhatinda. That since the complainant did not deliver the draft, he and Sh. AB. Shastri were not allowed to accompany arrested persons to Bhatinda, while Chand Ahuja continued giving threats that if the complainant did not give the draft then G.R. Hada and RK. Sharma would be brought to Bhatinda in the same way and the petitioner continued advising and threatening them to be sensible and to pay the amount. On December 10, 1985 while the complainant and others were present outside the Kotwali, Bhatin, Chand Ahuja and Lalit Ahuja accompanied by some other persons asked them to hand-over the draft, otherwise Anil Hada, RK. Gupta will not be bailed out, and they will be remanded to police custody and will be paraded through the main bazar in hand-cuffs. On the refusal of the complainant to deliver the draft, the petitioner made Anil Hada and RK. Gupta to walk on foot in and cuffs - from PS Kotwali, Bhatinda to the Courts through the main bazar of Bhatinda. On reaching the Courts, Chand Ahuja and Lalit Ahuja, with the aid and Connivance of the police headed by the petitioner threw open challenge to them that in case the draft was not delivered, Anil Hada and RK. Gupta will be remanded to police custody for 10 days and the complainant and others will also not be able to go to Delhi. Apprehending injury to himself, G.R. Hada and A.B. Shastri and other executives and in order to avoid harassment to Anil Hada and R.K. Gupta the complainant handed-over the draft for Rs. 3.5 lacs to Chand Ahuja. They were then assured that no police remand shall be obtained. ASI Sukhminder Singh then asked for only judicial remand and Anil Hada and R.K. Gupta were released on bail on December 11, 1985. It was subsequently found that no amount was payable to M/s. Mitkh Raj Madan Mohan by M/s. Rama Fibres Limited and a false report had been lodged to cause harassment, insult and humiliation to the complainant and others. That the draft had been obtained by way of extortion and the police had illegally obtained non-bailable warrants from the Court of CJM Bhatinda in order to help and facilitate in the commission of the offence.

(3.) Cr. M. 618 - M186 was brought by Anil Hada and others for quashing of the F.I.R. and the same was allowed vide order dated May 6,1986. After the petitioner and his co-accused were summoned on the basis of the complaint, the petitioner and his co-accused came to this Court in Cr. M. 3375- M/86 for quashing of the proceedings, which was, however, dismissed vide order dated Feb. 19, 1987. The SLP against that order was also dismissed by the Supreme Court. After recording the evidence, the Trial Court framed charges against the petitioner and his co-accused and this order was challenged by Chand Ahuja in Cr. R. 485 of 1989 and the order framing charge was set aside and the case was remanded for reconsideration. On April 25, 1990, the Magistrate again framed charge against the petitioner and his co-accused against which order a Cr. R. 491190 was filed and vide judgment dated December 6, 1990, this petition was allowed and it was directed that the case was triable as summons case and a direction was also issued that the question of requirement of sanction under Section 197 Cr. P.C. be also considered. Vide order ArmexureP6 dated April 2, 1991, the CJM Bhatinda ordered the issuance of a notice constituting the offence. The petitioner challenges the complaint Armexure P2 as well as the order Armexure P6.