A.S.NEHRA,J - (1.) BANTA Singh has filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing the proceedings under Section 182 of the Indian Penal Code initiated against the petitioner on the basis of calender sent by Police Station, Chappar.
(2.) BRIEFLY stated, the facts as mentioned in the petition are as follows :- On 19.10.1991 when a demarcation of Gohar was being effected by Rameshwar Dayal, Kanungo, then Surinder Singh, Harbans Singh and Sohan Singh came to the spot and started hurling abuses on the petitioner and his brothers Jarnail Singh and Karnail Singh and asked the Kanungo to stop the demarcation and ultimately a tiff arose between the parties. Sohan Singh gave a sword blow on the left shoulder of the petitioner and Surinder Singh gave a Danda blow on his mouth which broke the teeth of the lower jaw of the petitioner. Harbans Singh dragged the petitioner on the ground and gave him fist blows and kicks. When the brothers of the petitioner tried to save him, Surinder Singh gave a Danda blow on the left hand of Jarnail Singh. After receiving the injuries the petitioner along with his brothers went to Civil Hospital, Mustafabad to get them medically examined. In the night of 19.10.1991 a ruqa was sent to Police Station, Chhappar by the Doctor on which A.S.I. Roop Chand came to the hospital to record the statement of the petitioner. The petitioner narrated the whole occurrence but to the surprise of the petitioner, Roop Chand, A.S.I. did not record the real version properly and a case vide F.I.R. No. 133 was registered against the petitioner. On 16.11.1991, the police of Police Station, Chhappar sent a calender under Section 182 of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner had made a false statement against Surinder Singh and another. After receiving the calender dated 16.11.1991, the judicial Magistrate, Jagadhri, framed the charge against the petitioner under Section 182 of the Indian Penal Code on 7.7.1993. The petitioner filed a criminal complaint dated 14.12.1991 under Sections 323/324/325/213/506 of the Indian Penal Code on the same allegations on which he had made a statement before A.S.I. Roop Chand in the hospital against Surinder Singh and others. Copy of the complaint is Annexure P.2. The learned Magistrate after going through the preliminary evidence has summoned Surinder Singh, Sohan Singh, Harbans Singh and Roop Chand, A.S.I. under Sections 323/324/325/213/506 of the Indian Penal Code vide his order dated 7.7.1993. In State of Punjab v. Brij Lal Palta, AIR 1989 SC 355, a matter very much similar to the one in hand, was considered and it was held that once a complaint filed by the informant which is based on the same facts and allegations on which the first information was registered, is being proceeded with, it is not open to a Magistrate to take cognizance of any offence alleged to have been committed under Section 211, Indian Penal Code. It was further held that although Section 182, Indian Penal Code, is distinct from the offence under Section 211, the latter is a more serious offence and may include the offence under the former section. It is apparent that if the case under Section 182, Indian Penal Code, is allowed to proceed, a decision in the said case would tantamount to pre-judging the complaint filed by the petitioner. The prosecution of the petitioner under Section 182, Indian Penal Code, during the pendency of his complaint, is evidently an abuse of the process of the Court, and it would be but proper to secure the ends of justice, to quash these proceedings. It is ordered accordingly. Order accordingly.;