NIRBHAY SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) NIRBHAY Singh, the petitioner-herein is the complainant in case FIR No. 110 dated 29.5.2000, under Sections 451/427 IPC, registered at police station Sadar, Malerkotla against one Achara Singh son of Kapur Singh. After investigation of the case, the police submitted cancellation report before the concerned Court. Before any order could be passed with regard thereto, it was referred to the Lok Adalat held on 20.4.2000. On that date, the petitioner was not present. However, the Lok Adalat accepted the cancellation report. For reference, the impugned order runs as under :

(2.) THE grouse of the petitioner is that the order dated 20.4.2002 passed by the Lok Adalat is illegal, without jurisdiction, against the principles of natural justice and thus liable to be quashed.

(3.) MR . Jain vehemently contends that the Lok Adalat has transgressed its powers and could not pass the order accepting the cancellation report submitted by the prosecution agency in the manner it has been done. He then contends that the Lok Adalat can decide only such cases wherein the matter has been amicably compromised or settled by mutual agreement and in the instant case the petitioner, who had all the legal right to show his protest against the cancellation report, has not even been heard. The impugned order, thus, is thus liable to be quashed. In support of his contentions, he has relied upon a judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court rendered in Bhagwant Singh v. Commissioner of Police and another (AIR 1985 SC 1285) : 1985(2) RCR(Cr.) 259 (SC) and also the decision of this Court rendered in Yash Paul v. State of Punjab, 2002(1) RCR(Criminal) 562. He also relies upon another decision of this Court in Kamla Mehta v. General Manager, Rajasthan Roadways Transport Corporation and another (FAO No. 798 of 1999) decided on 7.11.2001, wherein the action of the Lok Adalat has been disapproved.