HARMEL SINGH Vs. STATE OF U.T. CHANDIGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this common judgment, I propose to dispose of the present petition (Criminal Misc. No. 44196-M of 2006) filed by Harmel Singh and Ranjit Kaur and also the petition (Criminal Misc. No. 48942-M of 2006) filed by Kulwinder Singh Padda and Sonia Padda, as both the petitions have been filed for quashing of the same FIR and the status of the petitioners is same in both the petitions qua respondent No. 2.

(2.) THE petitioners are seeking quashing of FIR No. 129 dated 17.4.2003 registered at Police Station, Sector 36, Chandigarh at the instance of respondent No. 2.

(3.) IT has been contended on behalf of the present petitioners as well as on behalf of Kulwinder Singh Padda and Sonia Padda, who are petitioners in Crl. Misc. No. 48942-M of 2006 that they have been unnecessarily and arbitrarily drawn in as accused at a very belated stage with the sole purpose of satisfying the whims of the complainant. There was not even a single allegation or mention about these petitioners in the complaint dated 20.12.2002 on the basis of which FIR in question was registered on 17.4.2003. Moreover, after thorough investigation, the police presented challan against Sandeep Singh Dhillon and Kuldeep Kaur, husband and mother-in-law, respectively, of the complainant whereas Prithpal Singh, father-in-law of the complainant, was found innocent. After the presentation of the challan, an application was submitted by the complainant to Inspector General of Police for re-investigation, which was ordered. Once a report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. had been submitted, there was no scope for re-investigation and at the most the matter could be simply further investigated. Even after the conclusion of re-investigation, no sufficient evidence was collected to show the complicity of two sisters of Sandeep Singh Dhillon and their respective husband in the present case, apart from the fact that it was mentioned in the FIR that at the time of the marriage, they were given pendent sets and gold rings. During the course of re-investigation, certain E-mails and an affidavit were relied by the prosecution on the basis of which supplementary challan was presented. Finally, it was prayed that the proceedings against the petitioners bet set aside by quashing the FIR and supplementary challan presented by the police.