DHARAM PAL SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners through the present criminal miscellaneous application seek to have the F.I.R. No. 110 dated 71-7-1982 for the offence under sections 363/366, I.P.C. lodged by Rattan Singh of Gazi Gulla Jullundur quashed in exercise of inherent powers of this Court under section 492 of the Criminal Procedure Code, on the ground that the facts therein do not disclose, any offence including the one alleged. The said first information report is in the following terms :-

(2.) MR . S.S Aulakh, learned counsel for the State, on the other hand argued that if for a moment it is conceded that the facts stated in the first information report do not disclose any offence even then the High Court would be competent to exercise its inherent jurisdiction to quash the first information report and for his submission abovesaid, he drew sustenance from a Division Bench decision of the Court reported in Saral Beopar Association Ltd., Jagadhri v. State of Haryana, I.L.R. 1971 (2) Punjab and Haryana 513.

(3.) THAT habeas corpus petition was allowed by D. S. Tewatia. J, on August 20, 1982, and Smt. Manjit Kaur was remitted to proceed with Amarjit Singh to Poona as his wife. In the premises, the contents of the first information report do not disclose any cognizable offence against the petitioners and hence the police authorities said no power to investigate the case. The Division Bench decision relied on the by the learned counsel for the State, in my opinion, is an authority only for the limited proposition as to whether it is open to the Court in exercise of its inherent power to stop the police from investigating a case registered with it if the investigation had been carried on in accordance with law, although on the face of it the first information report do not seem to disclose a cognizable offence. The ratio of that authority is not applicable to the facts and circumstances of this case. The expression in the interest of justice used in Section 482 of the Code. would call for the interference of the High Court in the interest of justice even at the stage where only a first information report is lodged with the police, if the first information report does not disclose any offence whatsoever. For in a matter where the first information report does not disclose any offence cognizable or non-cognizable that allowing the investigation and harass a citizen would certainly not be in the interest of justice. Against this kind of harassment of citizen the Court must exercise its inherent power whenever its assistance is sought by a citizen.