MOHAN SINGH CHATHA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant miscellaneous petition was filed by the petitioner- Mohan Singh Chatha S/o Shri Gurucharan Singh under Sec. 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of FIR No.165/2018 registered at Police Station Chunawad, District Sri Ganganagar for the offences under Ss. 436 and 457 of the IPC and all subsequent proceedings arising thereof qua the petitioner.

(2.) The concise facts that gave rise to the lodging of the FIR in the present matter are that the complainant approached the police on 6/9/2018 in order to initiate criminal proceedings against five named and 10-12 unnamed persons alleging that when he and his family were fast asleep, they heard noises of crackers being burst at around 02.00 a.m. He came out of his house and saw that the Bolero Car bearing vehicle No. RJ-13 UA 0269 which was parked in the garage was on fire. He and his family members tried to douse the fire but the car had burnt completely by then. When they stepped outside the gate of their house, they found a bucket filled with petrol fuel along with a cloth soaked with petrol. A jerrican cap which was reeking of petrol was also lying nearby and two empty bottles of beer were also found lying on the opposite side of the main gate of the house. Another empty beer bottle was found lying behind the burnt vehicle. It is further alleged that there were deep footprints of some people who would have entered the house by climbing over the wall. It is further expressed in the FIR that the complainant's younger brother was married to one Sarvjeet Kaur; they got a divorce and his brother married some one else on 3/9/2018. On the same day, i.e. 3/9/2018, it is alleged that some suspicious people came on two vehicles and fired two shots near their house, thus, the complainant felt that enraged by the marriage, the sons of Sarvjeet Kaur and their companions set his vehicle on fire. An FIR came to be lodged for commission of offences under Ss. 457 and 436 of IPC. During investigation, the police reached to the conclusion that the petitioner was the person behind the conspiracy and instigated the other co-accused persons to commit the crime as his sister was involved in a matrimonial fallout with the brother of the complainant, thus, the police made a case against the petitioner under Sec. 457, 436 and 120-B of IPC.

(3.) Shri Ravi Bhansali, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Shri D.L. Rawla, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, submitted that although the name of the petitioner does not find place in the FIR and the matter came to be lodged in the year 2018 but subsequently, due to inimical relationship and acting with an ulterior object to spite the petitioner, an endeavour has been made by the complainant party in connivance with the police to drag the name of the petitioner in this matter unnecessarily. Learned Senior Counsel further submitted that the petitioner is a Canadian citizen and has been residing there since 1996. At the relevant point of time, the petitioner was in Canada and did not visit India. The petitioner visited the country twice, once between 26/5/2018 and 14/6/2018 and another time, he visited India between 30/3/2019 to 11/4/2019 but nothing came up in the investigation against the petitioner till then. His arrival from Canada and departure from India for Canada is found in the government record.