MANJIT SINGH AUJLA Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB & OTHERS
LAWS(P&H)-2011-12-245
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Decided on December 12,2011

Manjit Singh Aujla Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Ranjit Singh Sarkaria, J. - (1.) THE petitioner has approached this Court for quashing of FIR No.37 dated 7.3.2004 registered at Police Station, Sultanpur Lodhi, District Kapurthala under Sections 420, 120 -B and 406 IPC on a complaint made by respondent No.2.
(2.) ON 3.10.1991, M/s Incan Mutual Benefit Ltd. was incorporated under Companies Act. On 25.4.1995, Col.B.M.Bhagi (Retd.) was appointed as Managing Director of the said company. The company had carried on its business till it was liquidated. From 3.10.1991 to 1997, the company is stated to have made profits and was in a good financial position. On 1.4.1997, the petitioner resigned from the Directorship/Chairmanship of the company. In the year 2004, the company was accused of mismanagement and pushed itself into losses. Respondent No.2 lodged a complaint on the basis of which the above -said FIR was registered against the petitioner as well. The grievance is that petitioner was wrongly shown as Managing Director in the year 1999. The petitioner, however, states that he never met the complainant and only the Branch Manager and three other persons stated that he was the Managing Director in the year 1999. Petitioner was not the Chairman of the said company in 1999. Accordingly, the petitioner claims that he has been falsely implicated. As per the petitioner, he had resigned on 1.4.1997.
(3.) THE co -accused of the petitioner, namely, Satnam Singh and Paramjit Kaur have already been discharged by the Judicial Magistrate on 4.2.2009. The petitioner accordingly filed this petition for quashing of the FIR on the grounds that the FIR is registered seven years ago and petitioner is being unnecessarily harassed and humiliated for no fault. He claims that he has been falsely implicated. As per the petitioner, the complaint does not make out any case worth the name against the petitioner. Investigation was made from the petitioner where he made a statement before the police. Petitioner has averred that this investigation would show his innocence. It is also stated that Col.B.M.Bhagi, who was Managing Director, would only be responsible person. Besides, it is pleaded that the co -accused have been discharged.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.