High Courts

Dharambir Singh vs State of Haryana

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 6 May 1996 · Citation: (1996) 3 RCR(Criminal) 226

HON’BLE JUDGES
V.K.Jhanji, J
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 8223-M of 1993
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

4 paragraphs · 302 words

V.K. Jhanji, J.

1.

In this petition, prayer is for quashing of report under Section 173, Cr.P.C. dated 28.2.1993 filed by S.H.O., Police Station City, Bhiwani against the petitioner for facing trial in case, FIR No. 233 dated 3.6.1939 under Sections 420, 465, 109, 467, 463 and 120B, I.P.C.

2.

The quashing has been sought on the ground that the Irrigation Department vide letter dated 3.4.1991 informed the prosecution that the petitioner had neither embezzled any amount nor misappropriated any amount of the department. On the basis of this letter, prosecution moved an application dated 26.4.1991 in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhiwani for discharging the accused and the said application was allowed as a result of which the petitioner was discharged. It has thus been contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that once the petitioner stood discharged the police had no jurisdiction to reinvestigate the case against the petitioner and submit challan on the same facts.

3.

I am not impressed with the argument raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner. The police had filed a report under Section 169, Cr.P.C. in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhiwani for discharging the petitioner from the case because at that time, there was no sufficient evidence against the petitioner to prosecute him but later on, SI Ram Singh, reinvestigated the case and during further investigation, the Executive Engineer, Ram Mehar, Irrigation Department, Bhiwani and R.C. Sharma, Accountant made statements under Section 161, Cr.P.C. that the petitioner was responsible for withdrawal of amount to the tune of Rs. 6,00,000/. It was on the basis of re investigation that challan was submitted in the Court. The Police has the power to reinvestigate the matter and, therefore, no interference is called for in this petition. Accordingly, this petition shall stand dismissed.