Harmohinder Kaur and anr Vs State of Punjab and anr - Court Judgment

Excerpt:
[r.v. raveendran; a. k. patnaik] indian penal code section 452 - house-trespass after preparation for hurt, assault or wrongful restraint -- after investigation, the police filed two challans on 02.02.2006 before the judicial magistrate, first class, ludhiana. after further investigation, the superintendent of police, city-ii, ludhiana, submitted his report to the deputy inspector general of police, ludhiana range. the relevant portion of the report of the superintendent of police, city-ii, ludhiana, which contains his conclusions after further investigation, is extracted herein below: "i found during my investigation that mohan singh, son of shri sher singh , dharmatma singh, harpal singh, jagdev singh and bhupinder singh, sons of mohan singh, residents of pullanwal, sold one plot of 1 kanal 13 marlas on 09.03.2004 to bharpur sigh, harnek singh, sons of balbir singh, jagjit singh, son of amarjit singh, gurcharan singh, son of hari dass and jagdev singh, son of harpal singh, resident of phulanawal through registered sale deed vasikha no.23895 and the mutation no.10940 duly entered in the name of purchasing party. for deciding the issue, we must first refer to the provisions of section 173 of the cr.p.c. under which the police submits reports after investigation and after further investigation, section 190 of the cr. p.c. under which the magistrate takes cognizance of an offence upon a police report and section 482 of the cr.p.c. under which the high court exercises its powers to quash the criminal proceedings. report of police officer on completion of investigation. cognizance of offences by magistrate. sub-section (8) of section 173 further provides that where upon further investigation, the officer in charge of the police station obtains further evidence, oral or documentary, he shall also forward to the magistrate a further report regarding such evidence and the provisions of sub-section (2) of section 173, cr.p.c., shall, as far as may be, apply in relation to such report or reports as they apply in relation to a report forwarded under sub-section (2). thus, the report under sub-section (2) of section 173 after the initial investigation as well as the further report under sub-section (8) of section 173 after further investigation constitute "police report" and have to be forwarded to the magistrate empowered to take cognizance of the offence. r.p. kapur moved the punjab high court under section 561-a of the code of criminal procedure for quashing the proceedings initiated by the first information report. 1. this is a petition under section 482 cr.p.c for quashing of order dated 17.01.2011, vide which, bails bonds and surety bonds of the petitioners have been cancelled and forfeited to the state and they have been summoned through non-bailable warrants. learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the petitioners were regularly appearing before the trial court except on one date i.e on 17.01.2011, on which date, the non-bailable warrants were issued against them. it is also submitted that the present petitioners have already filed crl. misc. no.m-27734 of 2011 praying for quashing of the criminal complaint dated 03.03.2005 which is pending before this court for 11.05.2011.2. taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the present petition is disposed of with a direction that in case, the crl. misc. no.m-12746 of 2011 2 petitioners surrender before the trial court on or before the next date of hearing, they shall be released on bail on their furnishing fresh bail bonds to the satisfaction of the trial court and subject to an undertaking that they shall, thereafter, appear regularly before the trial court.

Judgment:
1. This is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C for quashing of order dated 17.01.2011, vide which, bails bonds and surety bonds of the petitioners have been cancelled and forfeited to the State and they have been summoned through non-bailable warrants. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the petitioners were regularly appearing before the trial Court except on one date i.e on 17.01.2011, on which date, the non-bailable warrants were issued against them. It is also submitted that the present petitioners have already filed Crl. Misc. No.M-27734 of 2011 praying for quashing of the Criminal complaint dated 03.03.2005 which is pending before this Court for 11.05.2011.

2. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the present petition is disposed of with a direction that in case, the Crl. Misc. No.M-12746 of 2011 2 petitioners surrender before the trial Court on or before the next date of hearing, they shall be released on bail on their furnishing fresh bail bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court and subject to an undertaking that they shall, thereafter, appear regularly before the trial Court.