PRITPAL SINGH AND ANOTHER Vs. DARSHAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These four petitions apply for quashing of complaint dated 13.1.2006 (Annexure P-3) and also the summoning order dated 15.10.2007 (Annexure P-4) granted by the learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Samrala, District Ludhiana on perusal of the preliminary evidence. Also applied is for the quashing of all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom.

(2.) Criminal Misc. No. M-7149 of 2008 and Criminal Misc. No. M- 7610 of 2008 had been filed by the petitioners who were police officials posted at the concerned Police Station at the relevant point of time. Their commonality of grievance is as under:- Sohan Singh, a brother of respondent-complainant-Darshan Singh, had filed a complaint before the Punjab Human Rights Commission and had alleged, in the course thereof, that as many as 15 persons (nonpetitioners) in Criminal Misc. Nos. M-7149 of 2008 and No. M-7610 of 2008 had belaboured them on the indicated date with a view to be able to dispossess them from their land and to obtain possession thereof. On investigation, the allegations were found to be false. However, thereafter respondent-complainant Darshan Singh filed the present complaint (Annexure P-3) making similar allegations in respect of that very occurrence but against as many as 23 persons (including the petitioners in Criminal Misc. Nos. M-7149 of 2008 and 7610 of 2008). The essential grievance of the petitioners herein is that the very contradiction indicated above is adequate enough to justify an inference about the falsity of the complaint and further that they had nothing to do with the alleged occurrence because they are police officials and they had no axe to grind in the impugned incident.

(3.) Insofar as the petitioners in Criminal Misc. Nos. M-2905 of 2008 and M-8605 of 2008 are concerned, the averment made in the course of the petitions is that the complaint against them too deserve to be quashed as it had earlier been found, on investigation by the police, to be false. They also have a grievance that no role had been attributed to them. Even the Punjab State Human Rights Commission got the matter enquired into and the complaint made by the party opposite was found to be false. It is also the grievance of the petitioners therein that the present complaint is a counter-blast and aimed at harassing the petitioner therein just because they are related to the rival party of the respondent of the respondentcomplainant Darshan Singh.