Atul Jain vs State of Haryana

H.S. Rai, J.

Atul Jain and Monika Sehgal, both Graduates, residents of Yamuna Nagar, District Ambala, have filed this petition under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code for quashing F.I.R. No. 108, Police Station Naraingarh, dated 19.6.1988, under Section 294, Indian Penal Code.

The facts which led to the registration of the case, according to prosecution, are that ASI Sumer Chand along with two constables was present at TPoint Kala Amb on 19.6.1988. One Maruti Van No. DID5665 came there from Sadaura side and stopped at a distance of 20 paces from Tpoint. Two young boys and one young girl came out of the Maruti Van and stood near the Maruti Van on the road. The boys started kissing the girl and embracing each other. SI Sumer Chand with the help of the constables apprehended the two boys and the girl along with Maruti Van. On enquiry, the boys gave their names and addresses as Atul son of D.K. Jain, 76, Adarsh Nagar, Yamuna Nagar, and Sanjay son of Raghunadan Arya, House No. 924, Yamuna Nagar. The girl gave her name as Monika daughter of Buta Ram Sehgal, Sehgal Tent House, Yamuna Nagar. As, according to ASI Sumer Chand, Atul, Sanjay and Monika had committed an absenced act, so they were arrested and a case under Section 294, Indian Penal Code was registered.

The petitioners have their own version of the incident, which they gave in an application submitted to Senior Superintendent of Police, Ambala. Their version is that on 19.6.1988 they (Atul, Sanjay and their girl friend Monika) were travelling in Maruti Van No. DID5665 belonging to Atual and when they had reached Kala Amb and were in front of the police post, they were intercepted by DSP Rajbir Singh Deswal posted at Naraingarh. On enquiry, they had given their names and addresses to the DSP. According to them, the DPS threatened them and tried to pull out the girl from the Maruti Van. As he was resisted he started abusing and misbehaving with them. The girl was dragged out of the Van. All the three were taken to Police Station, Naraingarh. A demand for money was made by the Deputy Superintendent of Police. As they were not in a position to fulfil the demand, whatever cash they had along with their wrist watch, golden chain and gold rings were taken. They were stripped, tortured and ultimately a false case was registered against them.

The petitioner have prayed for quashing of the F.I.R. on the ground that the allegations therein are patently absurd and inherently improbable and even if they are taken on their face value, they do not attract the mischief of Section 294, Indian Penal Code.

I have heard the learned Counsel for the parties. It is not disputed that the petitioners were in a Maruti Van and the allegation against them is that they started kissing after parking the Van adjacent to police picket. It is also not disputed that the incident took place at the border of Haryana and Himachal Pradesh and there are two police posts near the place of occurrence, one in the Haryana territory and other in the Himachal Pradesh territory. It is not understandable why the petitioners, who were having a fast moving conveyance at their disposal, should park their vehicle in front of the police picket and start kissing and embracing on the roadside. They could easily drive the vehicle a few hundred yards ahead and do the same act there. They are graduates and are presumed to know that doing such an act in front of the police picket can land them in trouble. The argument of the learned Counsel for the petitioners that the FIR is a fabrication as, in fact, the petitioners were stopped by the D.S.P. and he had misbehaved with them and was demanding money and on their inability to give him money this false case was planted, may not be without substance. Their version also gets some support from a new item published in the Daily Tribune on 29.6.1988, copy of which has been attached as Annexure P2 which reads as under :

"The alleged stripping of two boys and a girl and then of their being beaten and locked up in Naraingarh police station for a night by the Naraingarh police on June 12, is still being resented here.

According to informed sources, the two boys of respectable families of Jagadhri, accompanied by a girl friend, went not Kala Amb for a joyride in their Maruti. As they approached Kala Amb barrier, they were intercepted by a police party led by the D.S.P. Naraingarh, who signalled them to stop. The D.S.P. asked them who they were. Not satisfied with their reply he took them to the Police Station, Naraingarh, where they were allegedly stripped and beaten up.

The D.S.P. it is learnt, offered to let them go if they paid a bribe. The boys expressed their inability to pay on the spot the huge amount demanded and promised to pay on it later. The D.S.P. then booked them under Section 294, I.P.C. (causing public nuisance under the influence of liquor).

It is now learnt that one of the boys, son of an industrialist, in order to avoid public disgrace has paid a huge amount to the D.S.P. who has in return promised to get the case dropped. The residents are demanding a high level enquiry into the case to bring out the truth."

The newsitem published by the Daily Tribune may not be of much value at this stage but, taking all the circumstances, into consideration, that is, the absurdly of the allegation and the fact that they had made a representation of the S.S.P. giving their version and the same version was reported by the Daily Tribune, the inference clearly is that the F.I.R. is concocted. Normally educated human beings are not expected to behave in the manner in front of a police post as the petitioners are alleged to have behaved.

As far as the scope of Section 294, Indian Penal Code, is concerned, it will not cover the allegations in the F.I.R. There is no allegation that they committed any obscene act in any public place to the annoyance of other as, according to FIR, nobody is stated to be present around except the police officials and, even otherwise kissing by two young people without any intention of annoying anyone will not be obscene.

Taking all the circumstances into consideration, I am of the view that this F.I.R. has been registered against the petitioners for reason other than mentioned in the F.I.R. and it does not disclose any offence under Section 294, Indian Penal Code. The same is quashed.

FIR quashed.