Gurdavinder Singh and Another vs State of Punjab and Others

Sabina, J.—Petitioners have filed this petition u/s 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeking quashing of the FIR No. 28 dated 07.05.2011 under Sections 342, 343, 344 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short IPC), registered at Police Station Kambo, District Amritsar Rural and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the FIR in question has been registered on the basis of secret information that the petitioners were running unauthorized de-addiction center in the name and style of Navjeevan Drug Counselling and Rehabilitation Center. Petitioners were charging Rs. 8,000/- per month from each patient and in case, a raid was conducted, then 40/50 persons who had been forcibly detained, could be freed. By leveling similar allegations, FIR No. 111 dated 25.02.2008 under Sections 420, 342, 343, 344 IPC was registered at Police Station Sadar, Amritsar. The said FIR was quashed by this Court in CWP No. 6659 of 2008 (Annexure P-6). The said order was upheld by the Apex Court vide order dated 09.11.2009 (Annexure P-7). Second FIR levelling similar allegations had been registered against the petitioners merely with a view to harass them.

Learned State counsel, on the other hand, has opposed the petition.

FIR No. 111 dated 25.02.2008 under Sections 420, 342, 343, 344 IPC was registered at Police Station Sadar, Amritsar against Kiran Foundation on the basis of secret information that petitioner No. 1 and others had opened a drug de-addiction Center in the name and style of Navjeevan Drug Counselling and Rehabilitation Center and were misguiding innocent persons by charging Rs. 6,000/- to 8,000/- from them. Competent MBBS Doctor was not available in the institute and 60/70 boys had been admitted in the Center without any authorization. This Court while allowing the petition has observed as under:-

A perusal of the FIR shows that it is contrary in all details to the report submitted by the DSP, Sadar, Amritsar dated 16.07.2007 (Annexure P-4) and the report submitted by the Civil Surgeon, Amritsar dated 28.11.2007 (Annexure P-5). Accordingly to these two reports submitted earlier, the Centre is treating the drug addicted patients and the statements of patients have also been recorded. There is no requirement that only M.B.B.S. Doctors were to run the Centre and it has come on record that B.A.M.S. doctors have been employed, which is consistent with the rehabilitation scheme given by the Central Government for the welfare of persons with disability (Annexure P-2). The scheme permit the running of such a Centre by a medical doctor, who may be M.B.B.S. or with an equivalent degree recognized by the Department of Indian Systems of Medicine. By no stretch of imagination, the B.A.M.S. doctor could be considered to be not equivalent to the degree of M.B.B.S. There is no provision of any Act recorded in the FIR, which could be alleged to have been violated by virtue of the fact that non-M.B.B.S. doctors have been treating the patients in the Centre.

Further allegation is that the Centre has no authorization and they are alleged to have committed offences under Sections 420, 343, 344 IPC. According to Section 342 IPC, which provides punishment for wrongful confinement, which u/s 340 IPC means that if a person wrongfully restrains any other person in such a manner as to prevent that person from proceedings beyond certain circumscribed limits then it is said to be wrongful confinement of that person. The other cognate Sections 343 and 344 IPC deal with aggravated form of the offence if wrongful confinement exceeds particular number of days. u/s 420 IPC, the definitions of cheating and dishonesty are given. The charges taken at their face value do not fulfill the basic ingredients of the substantive penal provision. It is strange that the patients admitted in the Centre have been considered as captive. Can it be said that there was a credible information with respondent No. 4. We fail to understand that on the face of the two reports given by the DSP and Civil Surgeon, Amritsar dated 16.07.2007 and 28.11.2007 (Annexure P-4 and P-5) respectively, where statements of various patients have been brought on record, how the allegation of wrongful confinement could be substantiated. This is a sheer figment of imagination of respondent No. 4. The information in the FIR is far from creditworthy. It is apparent that the FIR against the petitioner has been recorded on some extraneous consideration by respondent No. 4. The report of DSP, Sadar, Amritsar could have easily guided respondent No. 4 that the Centre is neither misguiding the innocent people by admitting them in the Centre nor it is violative of any penal law. Therefore, the registration of FIR is complete misuse of the power vested in the police and the same can not be commended by us.

Thus, with regard to the same Center, FIR leveling similar allegations was registered and the same was quashed by the Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 20.05.2008. The said judgment was upheld by the Apex Court vide order dated 09.11.2009 (Annexure P-7).

In these circumstances, continuation of criminal proceedings against the petitioners by leveling same allegations is nothing but abuse of process of law. Accordingly, this petition is allowed. FIR No. 28 dated 07.05.2011 under Sections 342, 343, 344 and 420 IPC, registered at Police Station Kambo, District Amritsar Rural and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are quashed.