Date Of Decision: 10.10.2023 vs State Of Himachal Pradesh & Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 15857 HP

                                                    1
                IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH,
                                SHIMLA
                                                                Cr.MMO No.451 of 2023




                                                                                   .

                                     Date of Decision: 10.10.2023
        __________________________________________________________
         Jagdish Chand





                                                       ....Petitioner
                                              Versus

        State of Himachal Pradesh & Others





                                                   ...Respondents
    ___________________________________________________________
      Coram
        Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sushil Kukreja, Judge

        Whether approved for reporting?1

        _________________________________________________________
        For the Petitioner                    : Mr. Ashok Kumar Thakur,
                                                Advocate.



        For Respondents                        : Mr. Raj Kumar Negi, Additional
        No.1 to 3.                               Advocate General.
        For Respondent No.4     : Mr. Khem Raj, Advocate, vice Mr.




                                  Vijender Katoch, Advocate.
        ___________________________________________________________





        Sushil Kukreja, Judge (Oral)

By way of the instant petition, the petitioner has

prayed for quashing of FIR No.140 of 2021, dated

06.09.2021, registered under Sections 325, 447, 504, 506,

427 readwith Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, at Police

Station Indora, District Kangra, H.P., on the ground that

1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the said case at

the behest of the private respondent No.4, who happens to

.

be the complainant.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted

that no case is made out against the petitioner and the FIR

has been lodged just to cause harassment to the petitioner

and the same is evident from the fact that there was seven

days delay even in lodging of the FIR. Learned counsel

further submitted that even the perusal of the final

investigation report would demonstrate that no offence, as

alleged to have been committed by the petitioner, is made

out and therefore, it would be in the interest of justice in

case the present petition is allowed by quashing the FIR.

3. Learned Additional Advocate General, who is

appearing for respondents No.1 to 3, has submitted that the

present petition is nothing, but an abuse of the process of

law, for the reason that as now the final report under

Section 173 of the Criminal Procedure Code stands filed in

the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Indora,

District Kangra, H.P. He further submitted that the Co-

ordinate Bench of this Court in Cr.MMO No.452 of 2023,

dated 10.05.2023, has dismissed the petition for quashing

.

of the same FIR, filed by the co-accused Sheela Devi and

others.

4. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner as

well as learned Additional Advocate General for respondents

No.1 to 3/State and learned counsel for respondent No.4

and have also gone through the material available on

record.

5. It is not disputed that for quashing of the same

FIR No.140 of 2021, dated 06.09.2021, the co-accused

Sheela Devi and others have filed a petition, bearing

Cr.MMO No.452 of 2023, which was dismissed by a Co-

ordinate Bench of this Court on 10.05.2023, by observing

as under:-

"It is a matter of record that an FIR has been lodged against the petitioner and after the completion of the investigation now the final report stands submitted in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Indora, District Kangra, H.P. `Therefore, it is for the said Court to go into the final report, filed under Section

173 of the Criminal Procedure Code and take a call as to whether the petitioner is to be

.

discharged or he should be made to face the

trial. The petitioner has a right to make his submission at the stage of framing of charges

and this Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, cannot be called upon to act as the Court of Judicial Magistrate and scrutinize the final

report submitted under Section 173 of the Criminal Procedure Code and then decide as to whether the petitioners be discharged or they

should be made to face the trial."

6. Therefore, in view of the fact that the similar

petition for quashing the same FIR No.140 of 2021, dated

06.09.2021 has been dismissed by a Co-ordinate Bench of

this Court, the present petition also deserves to be

dismissed. Hence, the present petition is dismissed.

Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall

also stand disposed of.

                                            ( Sushil Kukreja )
    October 10, 2023                              Judge
          (subhash)