GAMMI @ GAMA Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has filed this petition, seeking quashing of the complaint/calendra filed against him under Section 182 IPC, (Annexure P-2), dated 12.8.2003. The primary ground raised by the petitioner is that no cognizance of an offence under Section 182 IPC can be taken against him as the offence as alleged is barred by limitation in terms of the provisions of Section 468 Cr.P.C.

(2.) THE facts necessary to appreciate the submission made by the petitioner are that one Nizamdin filed a complaint on 2.2.2001, on the basis of which FIR under Sections 342, 363, 364, 452, 506, 148, 149 IPC was registered against various persons. One of the accused named in the FIR, namely, Basira Ali, moved an application before S.S.P., Ropar, on 5.2.2001, seeking an enquiry into the false and frivolous case registered against him and his co-accused. This application was marked to DSP, Head Quarter, for detailed enquiry and investigation. Avtar Singh, DSP, conducted enquiry in this case and examined various witnesses. He ultimately found that Kaka son of Wali Mohd., resident of Jandiala, Police Station Jalandhar had recorded his false name and address and had got registered the false FIR No. 10 dated 2.2.2001 in connivance with Sher Ali and Gammi (present petitioner). On the basis of this enquiry, cancellation report was filed on 1.4.2001.

(3.) ON notice having been issued, reply on behalf of the State is filed. The fact of lodging of FIR by Nizamdin against Basira Ali, Dhani etc. is conceded and so also the fact that this FIR was found to be false on an enquiry held by DSP. It is also submitted that calendra under Section 182 IPC has been filed in the Court of Ilaqa Magistrate/Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ropar, against the petitioner and his co-accused. The stand of the State is that calendra/complaint has been filed within a period of limitation prescribed under Section 468 Cr.P.C. and the Court, thus, is competent to take cognizance of the offence alleged against the petitioner.