SURENDER SINGH RAO Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER seeks quashing of F.I.R. No. 887 dated 23.11.1989 registered under Sections 147, 148, 149 and 506, 323, 424, 120-A and 171 IPC Exhibit P-5 and for issuance of any appropriate order. It is case of the petitioner that he is working as an Executive Officer, Municipal Committee, Gurgaon that a person named Ram Kumar Yadav, alleged to be the Chief General Secretary of Janata Dal, made a false complaint against the petitioner - F.I.R. No. 887 dated 23.11.1989, solely with a view to harass the petitioner and with ulterior motive. According to the petitioner, he was on duty in his office and not on any election booth, as alleged by the complainant. Had this been so, the department would have proceeded against the petitioner. Since no departmental proceedings against the petitioner in the department are pending it would be just that no occurrence as such took place. In fact the petitioner is being harassed by the complainant and being transferred from one place to another and during the last three years he had been transferred 16 times. It is with a view to get rid of this harassment that petitioner filed a writ petition hearing No. 12230 of 1990, wherein the Division Bench admitted the same on 11.9.1990 and also stayed the last transfer order. With these averments, it has been stated that allegations made in the F.I.R. even if taken at its face value do not constitute any offence. Had this occurrence took place as alleged on 22.11.1989, departmental proceedings would have been initiated against him.

(2.) NOTICE was issued on 12.10.1990 and further action against the petitioner on the basis of F.I.R. No. 887 dated 23.11.1989 was ordered to be stayed. Reply has been filed by the respondent. This F.I.R. was registered on the complaint of Ram Kumar Yadav Chief General Secretary, Janata Dal, accusing the petitioner of helping Col. Ram Singh, Congress (1) candidate for Mahendergarh Parliamentary Constituency by actively participating in his election as well as scaring away the voters of Janata Dal party by his un-lawful and illegal activities with the help of gundas. This complaint pertains to year 1989. Charges levelled against the petitioner are quite vague. Exact time and place when he was threatened by the petitioner does not find mention in the complaint. It is the specific case of the petitioner that he had been performing his duties in his office. According to him, he was not on duty on any of the election booths, as alleged by the complainant. This ascertain of the petitioner stands un-controverted.