Sukhvinder Singh vs State of Haryana

S.C. Malte, J.

This revision is against the order dated 19.8.1997 by which the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Dabwali, issued process against the accused for offence under Section 182 of the Indian Penal Code.

As such in my opinion, the Revision should have been filed in the Sessions Court instead of High Court. In my opinion, if two Courts having different hierarchy hold concurrent jurisdiction, it is always desirable that the litigatant should prefer the Court at lower hierarchy. The concurrent jurisdiction of two Courts at different hierarchy is conferred under Section 399 for the reasons that in certain circumstances, the High Court would also be in a position to entertain the revision before the Sessions Court would not be adequate remedy. However, since this Court has already taken cognizance of this case by issuing a notice to the A.G. Haryana, I propose to dispose of this revision petition on merits.

The matter has arisen out of the acquittal of the accused in Sessions Case No. 148 of 1994 (Sessions Trial No. 45 of 1995) in the Court of Sessions Judge, Sirsa. Five accused in that case were being prosecuted for the offence under Sections 364, 302, 148 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code etc. It was initiated on the basis of FIR registered on the complaint of one Sukhwinder Singh, who later on was arrayed as accused in that case. The FIR lodged by the said Sukhwinder Singh indicates that his brother Gurmail Singh had been missing since 1.7.1994. In the FIR, suspicion was indicated on accused Jagdeep Singh, Gurdeep Singh and Ujjaggar Singh on the ground that they might have eliminated Gurmail Singh who was suspected to have illicit relations with one Satbir Kaur who was the daughter of Ujjaggar Singh. After holding the investigation in the case, the police filed the challan under section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the accused, including Sukhwinder Singh who was informant himself. It appears that, according to the Police, Sukhwinder Singh by giving false report has put the Police in action on altogether a different track in order to screen himself from punishment. It appears from the judgment of the Sessions Court mentioned above that, though the car of deceasedGurmail Singh was located, the said Gurmail Singh, either dead or alive, was not at all found during the investigation. The Sessions Judge further observed that the prosecution witnesses totally declined to support the prosecution version. In other words, these witnesses seem to have resiled from their statements made before the Police. The learned trial Judge was of the view that there was absolutely no evidence to show the complicity of the accused. He, therefore, by judgment dated 29.3.1995 acquitted all these accused.

After acquittal of the accused, the police has moved the Magistrate under Section 182 of the Indian Penal Code on the allegations that the said Sukhwinder Singh by filing the false complaint, has made the police to use their lawful authorities for investigation of a case which turned out to be based on false allegations.

It may be noted that the Police, after the investigation, seems to have been fully satisfied that there was enough material to send a charge sheet against all these accused under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. In other words, it was not a case in which it turned out that there was no material to justify forwarding the accused to the Magistrate, and that, he deserved to be discharged under Section 169 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. After having failed to book the accused in the Sessions trial, there hardly remains justification to further proceed against the accusedSukhwinder Singh for the offence under Section 182 of the Indian Penal Code on the allegations that he had initiated the investigation by filing a false FIR. In my opinion, therefore, the order passed by the Magistrate deserves to be set aside. Accordingly, the revision petition is allowed. JUDGMENT dated 19.8.1997 passed by the learned Magistrate to summon the accused to face the trial under Section 182 of the Indian Penal Code stands hereby quashed.