BALDEV KRISHAN CHOPRA Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER Baldev Krishan Chopra has filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for issuing direction to the State of Punjab and Director General of Police, respondents No. 1 and 2 herein, for initiating proceedings under Section 182 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as 'IPC') against respondent No. 3.

(2.) THE petitioner in this case is elected Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat, Village Gillan Wala, Tehsil and District Ferozepur. During his tenure, Gram Panchayat leased out certain land of the Panchayat to the residents of the village by public auction. Respondent No. 3 Milkha Singh alias Mulka Singh, who is a resident of village, had also taken some piece of land on lease. It is his case that he made certain payment of the lease amount to the Sarpanch, but the same was not recorded in the Panchayat account and the amount was mis- appropriated. In that regard, he made a written complaint to the Chief Minister, Punjab, on 21.3.2005. It is the case of the petitioner that the said complaint was enquired into by Superintendent of Police (D) Faridkot. During the enquiry, allegations levelled by respondent No. 3 were found to be false. It is the further case of the petitioner that the DSP (D) Faridkot also recommended for initiation of proceedings under Section 182 IPC against respondent No. 3. When no action was taken against respondent No. 3, petitioner filed the instant petition for issuing direction to respondents No. 1 and 2 for initiating proceedings under Section 182 IPC against respondent No. 3.

(3.) COUNSEL for respondent No. 3 has submitted that respondent No. 3 made a complaint to the Chief Minister of the State about some irregularities committed by the Sarpanch of the village. In case, on enquiry, those allegations were found to be false, decision to initiate or not to initiate proceedings under Section 182 IPC is to be taken by the authority/public servant before whom the complaint was made or by public servant to whom he is administratively subordinate. Counsel for respondent submits that such decision is to be taken by the said authority after taking into consideration the various factors and since in this case, a complaint was made by a resident of the village to the Chief Minister of the State about some irregularities committed by the Sarpanch of the village, the office of Chief Minister is to decide whether to initiate proceedings against respondent No. 3 under Section 182 IPC, when the allegations were found to be false. Counsel contends that in such cases, the court should not issue direction to the competent authority to initiate the proceedings against the resident of a village for initiating proceedings under Section 182 IPC for making complaint to the Chief Minister of the State against Sarpanch of the village. While referring to decisions of this Court in Sardari Lal v. State of Punjab and another, 1992(2) RCR(Criminal) 13 and Baldev Singh v. State of Haryana, 2006(1) RCR(Criminal) 147, counsel for respondent No. 3 submits that when a complaint is made to the Chief Minister or the Prime Minister and if the allegations made in the same are found to be false, then the subordinate police officials cannot file the complaint for initiating proceedings under Section 182 IPC.