In CRM-M-33661 of 2022-PUNJ HC- Mere pendency of civil litigation between parties not ground for quashing FIR: P&H HC Justice Avneesh Jhingan [01-08-2022]

Read Order: Mangal Singh and Others v. State of Punjab

Monika Rahar

Chandigarh, August 8, 2022: While dealing with a quashing plea, the High Court of Punjab and Haryana has recently held that merely because civil litigations are pending between the parties this itself will not be a ground for quashing the FIR. 

Essentially, the Bench of Justice Avneesh Jhingan was dealing with a quashing plea seeking quashing of an FIR and the charge-sheet filed in the said case. 

The brief facts of the matter are that an FIR was registered under Sections 448, 511, 473, 506 and 201 IPC at the instance of one Surenderpal Singh (now deceased) who contended that he had an agricultural land, on a portion of which, his father got constructed Gurudwara Sahib while rest of the land was kept vacant on which fencing was done and a gate was placed. 

Allegedly, the first petitioner along with some unknown persons tried to trespass the said land, as a result of which the matter was reported to the police and thereafter, a suit was filed. In 2018, allegedly, a group of 70-80 unknown persons armed with weapons tried to encroach upon the land of Gurudwara Sahib by breaking the fence and boundary. A video recording of the incident was done. 

It was alleged that the first petitioner broke the fence and wall of Gurudwara Sahib, uprooted the gate and damaged its property. It was claimed that unknown persons can be identified by the complainant. Three vehicle numbers were mentioned in the FIR. Resultantly, the first petition was arrested.  After investigation, the final report was submitted and charges were yet to be framed.

It was the case of the Counsel for the petitioner that there were civil litigations pending between the parties. He further submitted that no case was made out under Section 448 IPC. The accused were not taking possession of their own land and not of the land on which Gurudwara Sahib was situated, the Counsel argued while also submitting that civil dispute was given colour of criminal litigation.

On the submissions made by the Counsel for the petitioner, the Court observed that the issues raised by counsel were disputed questions of facts and these were defences available to the accused during trial, and therefore, the Bench opined that it would be required to be substantiated by evidence.

Further, Jhingan added, “Merely as civil litigations are pending between the parties this itself will not be a ground for quashing the FIR, more-so when there are specific allegations that Gurudwara Sahib situated on the ancestral land of the complainant was damaged and there is a video recording supporting the allegations.”