S.D. Bajaj, J. - (1.) Petitioner Surinder Singh is son of respondent No.3 Kuldip Singh. Sister of the petitioner is married to respondent No.2 Bhupinder Vir Singh. All the three persons aforesaid are partners of Zeal Industries, Jalandhar, a pipe manufacturing concern. Petitioner has 50% share, respondent No.3 has another 40% while the remaining 10% is the share of respondent No.2. Marriage between respondent No.2 and the sister of the petitioner allegedly broke down. Respondent No. 2, therefore, brought the business activity of the firm to a halt and no business whatsoever of manufacturing and trading was conducted by it during the year 1987-88.
(2.) On 29th March, 1988 respondent No.2 sent to D.I.G. Jalandhar the complaint Annexure P.1 stating that respondent No.2 and the petitioner were initially the two partners of M/S. Zeal Industries with effect from 17th Jan., 1976 and respondent No.3 joined it with effect from 1st April, 1978, that in the year 1987-88 the business of the partnership concern almost broke down and, therefore, respondent No.2 left Jalandhar in Dec., 1987 after locking the main shed, workshop, stores and fitting shop, that major capital of the petitioner and respondent No.3 was refunded to them through account Payee cheques since the partnership stood dissolved, that on return back to Jalandhar on 28th March, 1988 respondent No.2 found that the original locks axed by him Dec., 1987 had since been changed by the petitioner after removing machinery, raw material and other assets of the partnership. An accusation of theft of partnership property was thus made against the petitioner by respondent No.2 in the complaint Annexure P.1.
(3.) After obtaining the legal opinion of District Attorney, Jalandhar, D.I.G., Jalandhar, forwarded the complaint to S.S.P. who in return ordered registration of case for trespass and theft thereon against the petitioner. S.H.O., Police Station Division No.1, Jalandhar, registered the case and commenced investigation therein. Accused: petitioner Surinder Singh has thus moved in this Court Cr.M. No. 4003-M of 1988 for quashing of the first Information Report on the ground that the dispute between the parties is wholly of a civil nature, that a civil suit in this regard is also pending in the court of Shri S.S. Hundal, Sub Judge 1st Class, Jalandhar, that the allegations of trespass and theft levelled against the petitioner in respect of partnership property are all misconceived and that the partnership deed contains an arbitration clause which obviously disentitled respondent No.2 from filing the complaint Annexure P.l.;