BAKHSHISH KAUR,J - (1.) SHINGARA Singh, petitioner, has filed this petition under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short the 'Code') for quashing FIR No. 17 dated 18.5.1994, registered at Police Station Tanda, District Hoshiarpur, for the offence under Sections 420, 468, 114 and 120-B IPC.
(2.) THE petitioner's case is that he has been falsely implicated in this case due to enmity. Even the parents of the students have given in writing that no illegal gratification was paid. Copy of the some is Annexure P-1. They have specifically stated that they obtained the certificates of their children of their own in March, 1993 and got them admitted in a private school. They have no grouse against the Headmaster or any other teacher of the Government Middle School, Jalalpur. They also stated that certain persons are levelling false and baseless allegations against the Headmaster and the teachers of the school. Taking support from Annexure P-1, which is stated to be signed by the respondents of village Jalalpur, where the School is situated and certain other affidavits of the parents filed during the pendency of the petition, it is averred that the proceedings may be quashed. The affidavits of the residents of that area filed during the pendency of the petition, are not a deciding factor for quashing the FIR, registered against the petitioner. A necessary probe has already been made regarding the allegations against the petitioner. It will be appropriate if the matter is left open for the trial court to come to be conclusion whether the allegations found in the FIR and other material brought on the record, is correct or not. It is well settled that the power of quashing a criminal proceeding should be exercised very sparingly and with circumspection and that too in the rarest of rare cases. In this regard, reliance is placed on State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, AIR 1992 SC 604. In that case, the Apex Court has laid down certain categories of cases wherein power under Section 482 of the Code could be exercised either to prevent abuse of the process of the Court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice. One of such cases wherein such power could be exercised is where the allegations made in the first information report or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in entirety do not prime facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused. Secondly, where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge.
(3.) AT the time of motion hearing on October 11, 1994, further proceedings pursuant to FIR No. 47/94 dated 18.5.1994 were stayed till further orders. Crl. Misc. 9455 of 2000 has been filed by the State for vacation of the stay order. It is clear that on account of the operation of the stay order, the prosecution has not been able to file the challan in the Court. Sanction for the prosecution of the accused under Section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act has already been accorded by the Director, Education Department (S), Punjab, Chandigarh.;