Punjab-Haryana High Court
Simarjit Singh Bains vs State Of Punjab on 21 February, 2025
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:026034
CRM-M-65003
65003-2023 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
202 CRM
CRM-M-65003-2023
Date of Decision: 21.02.2025
SIMARJIT SINGH BAINS ...Petitioner(s)
Versus
STATE OF PUNJAB ...Respondent(s)
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA
Present:- Mr. A.P. S. Deol,
Deol Sr. Advocate with
Mr. Vishal R. Lamba, Advocate and
Mr. Himmat Singh Deol, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Satjot Singh Chahal, AAG, Punjab.
TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA,
DAHIYA J. (Oral)
The instant petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
seeking quashing of FIR no.147, dated 11.07.2022
11.07.2022, registered under Section
174-A IPC, at Police Station Sarabha Nagar,, District Ludhiana, Annexure P-2,,
and all consequential proceedings pending before the Judicial Magistrate Ist
Class, Ludhiana.
Ludhiana
2. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner contends that att the time
when the incident in question transpired, the petitioner was MLA from Atam
Nagar Constituency,
Constitue Ludhiana. He had been implicated in the case FIR
no.118,
118, dated 12.06.2018,
12.06.2018, registered under Sections 451, 353, 186 and 506
IPC, at Police Station Sarabha Nagar, Ludhiana
Ludhiana. During trial, vide order dated
01.07.2022, he was declared a proclaimed person
person, and the present FIR was
registered against him under Section 174-A
A IPC. Learned counsel has further
contended that the petitioner was not aware of the proceedings pending before
the trial Court in the case, and came to know about it on 11.07.2022, when he
surrendered on his own before the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Ludhiana
Ludhiana, in
1 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:026034
CRM-M-65003
another case, FIR no.180/2021, registered at Police Station Division no.6,
Ludhian. The instant FIR was lodged on the same date later in the evening at
19:52 hours by
b showing him a proclaimed person
person.. Once he has surrendered
before the trial Court on 11.07.2022,, he could not have been declared a
proclaimed person the same day. The application for discharge moved by him
before the trial Court on this ground has been wrongly dismissed,, vide order
dated 11.10.2023,
11.10.2023 by holding that surrender in another FIR has no relevance
in the instant case.
3. Still further, it has been submitted that the petitioner stands
acquitted in the main case,
case i.e., FIR no.118, dated 12.06.2018
12.06.2018,, vide judgment
dated 05.10.2023,
05.10.2023 as the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond any
shadow of doubt. Once he has been acquitted in the main case, no purpose
will be served by proceeding against him in the instant FIR registered under
Section 174-A
A IPC.
4. Learned State counsel, on the contrary, contends that the
petitioner is not entitled to any benefit on account of surrender in another case
on 11.07.2022,
11.07.2022 as it is inconsequential so far as the instant case is concerned.
He was declared a proclaimed
proclaimed person on 01.07.
01.07.2022, though the FIR in
question was lodged on 11.07.2022.
5. Heard.
6. Admitted facts on record are, the petitioner has already been
acquitted in the main case, i.e., FIR no.118, dated 12.06.2018, registered
under Sections 451, 353,
353, 186 and 506 IPC, at Police Station Sarabha Nagar,
Ludhiana,, vide judgment dated 05.10.2023. B
Besides, he had appeared before
the trial Court and was admitted to bail vide order dated 01.02.2023,,
2 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:026034
CRM-M-65003
condoning the default. The instant FIR has been lodged only to secure his
presence in the case which already stands decided by acquitting him of the
charges. Besides, the petitioner's absence from the proceedings in itself does
not make it intentional.
intentional It is also a fact that he had surrendered before the
Court in another case in the morningg on 11.07.2022
11.07.2022, prior to lodging of the
FIR that day.
7. Also, the law is settled that once the accused stands acquitted in
the main case, proceedings against him under Section 174
174-A IPC will be an
abuse of the process of law. A reference in that regard can be made to the
judgment by this Court in CRM-M-28537-2022
2022 titled Mohit alias Mohit
Bhupal v.. State of Punjab and another,
another holding as under:
12. In the present case, FIR No.113 dated 26.06.2021 was
registered under Sections 323, 324, 148, 149 of the IPC (Sections
325 and 326 of the IPC have been added later on) at Police
Station Mahilpur, District Hoshiarpur against the present
petitioner and during the course of the proceedings in sai
said
d FIR,
the petitioner was declared as proclaimed offender vide order
dated 07.01.2022 (Annexure P
P-2)
2) in which, the Judicial
Magistrate Ist Class, Garhshankar had directed that necessary
intimation be sent to the concerned Police Station and it is in
pursuance of the said order that the present FIR under Section
pursuance
174 A of the IPC has been registered. A perusal of the order
174-A
dated 07.04.2022 (Annexure P-3)
P 3) would show that the petitioner
has been granted regular bail in FIR No.113 and in the said
proceedings, compromise
compromise has been effected between the parties
and it is on the basis of the said compromise, FIR No.113 has
been quashed by this Court vide order dated 31.05.2022
(Annexure P-5).
P 5). Since, the present FIR was registered on account
of non-appearance
n in the trial
ial Court in FIR No
No.113
113 which has
ultimately been quashed, thus, in view of law laid down in the
3 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:026034
CRM-M-65003
abovecited judgments, further proceedings in the present FIR
would be an abuse of process of the Court
Court.
8. Accordingly, this petition is allowed. FIR no.147, dated
Accordingly,
11.07.2022, registered under Section 174-A
174 A IPC, at Police Station Sarabha
Nagar, District Ludhiana,
Ludhiana, and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom
therefrom,,
are hereby quashed qua the petitioner.
(TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA))
JUDGE
21.02.2025
Ad
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether reportable Yes/No
4 of 4
