KHUSHAL SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., seeking the quashing of FIR No. 45 dated 5.4.1996, registered at Police Station Focal Point, Ludhiana, under Sections 420/506 IPC against the petitioner Khushal Singh, son of Inder Singh, resident of village Mundian Kalan, district Ludhiana. Harjinder Singh/respondent No. 2 and Paramjit Singh/respondent No. 3 jointly lodged the aforesaid FIR, alleging, inter alia, that one Tara Singh son of Khushinder Singh @ Jagtar Singh, resident of village Mundian Kalan, Ludhiana promised to get the said respondents employed abroad and in that connection a sum of Rs. two lacs were taken by him from them. The respondent Nos. 2 and 3 were taken to some other places and brought back to Ludhiana. They were, however, not taken to the place promised to them. Tara Singh assured the complainants/respondents to return the said amount of Rs. 2 lacs, but the same was not paid to them and instead they were threatened with dire consequences. Tara Singh also withheld the passports of the complainants/respondents. The other person named in the FIR was Jagtar Singh. The petitioner is the younger brother of Khushinder Singh alias Jagtar Singh. The petitioner has averred about the police party comprising of Manmohan Singh, DSP, Focal Point, Ludhiana (respondent No. 4), Kuldip Singh and Surjit Singh besides the SHO of police station Focal Point, Ludhiana visiting the house of the petitioner on 1.4.1995 and taking him with them. Jagtar Singh aforesaid filed a criminal writ petition No. 274 of 1995 in this Court, which came up before V.K. Bali, J. for hearing, who appointed a warrant officer. The warrant officer reached the police station Focal Point Ludhiana and secured the release of the petitioner. It was further mentioned that V.K. Bali, J. passed severe strictures against the police officials vide his order dated 5.4.1995, a copy of which is Annexure P2. The petitioner, thereafter, received threats from the police in the event of his taking any legal action against the said police officials. The police again visited his house on 18.7.1995, but the petitioner was not present at home at that time The petitioner applied for anticipatory bail before the Sessions Judge, Ludhiana, who vide order dated 16.8.1995 (copy Annexure P4) directed that in case the petitioner is to be arrested by the police, he would be given a week's time before being arrested so that he could apply for anticipatory bail.

(2.) THE FIR is sought to be quashed on the grounds that the police was bent upon in falsely implicating the petitioner in a criminal case, by fabricating a false story. The name of the petitioner has not been mentioned in the FIR. Though the occurrence, as per complaint (copy Annexure P5), allegedly took place in the year 1993, but no remedy was sought immediately thereafter against Jagtar Singh, elder brother of the petitioner. The police recorded the statements of respondent Nos. 2 and 3 on 10.5.1996, wherein the complicity of the petitioner in this case was stated. The contention of the petitioner is that the bare perusal of the amended statement of the complainants will go to show that the petitioner has been implicated at the behest of the police, just to take revenge from the petitioner as this Court had passed severe strictures against the police officials.

(3.) NOTICE of motion was issued to the respondents, who filed reply to the petition. It has been alleged in the preliminary objections that the petitioner has concealed the material facts from this Court. It was categorically denied that the petitioner had been falsely implicated in connivance with the police in the impugned FIR. The true facts, it was alleged, were that the petitioner along with his brother Jagtar Singh was doing the business of making money illegally, by sending the persons abroad by false representation, by playing fraud, on the fictitious passports. The complainants/respondents were one of the victims, who had paid a sum of Rs. two lacs to the said accused persons, who had not returned the money. The petitioner and his brother - Jagtar Singh, on the other hand, physically assaulted the answering respondents and even threatened them with their lives in the presence of Jitender Mittal, whose statement had since been recorded by the Investigating Officer. It was contended that there was sufficient evidence against the petitioner in the statements of Jitender Mittal, Harjinder Singh and Paramjit Singh and even the petitioner himself had admitted his guilt and had promised to pay the money back, but it was not paid. It was further submitted that after filing of the challan, the case is fixed for naming the charge and the Court at that stage is required to look into the material collected during investigation.