Parveen Kumar vs State of Haryana

K.K. Srivastava, J.

Petitioner/Parveen Kumar has filed this petition for quashing FIR No. 837 dated 27.6.1997, under Sections 406/201 and 189 IPC, registered at police station City Karnal (copy of which has been placed on record as Annexure P1) and all subsequent proceedings taken on the basis thereof. The FIR was registered on the complaint made by Shri Kuldeep Gupta, Convener, Flying Squad, Principal, DAV College, Pundri against the petitioner/Parveen Kumar, a candidate of M.A. (Previous) Hindi in Kurukshetra University, bearing roll number 77367. In the examinations held by the Kurukshetra University for M.A. (Previous) in Hindi, fourth paper was held on 27.6.1997. The seat of the petitioner was placed in room No. 9 in Dyal Singh College, Karnal Centre. Shri M.L. Gupta, a member of the flying squad had caught the petitioner redhanded while indulging in copying. The answer sheet supplied to him in the examination and the incriminating material, which was used for copying, were brought to the room of the Superintendent along with the candidate/Parveen Kumarpetitioner, who was asked to accept the second answerbook and to give his written statement on the proforma meant for unfair means. The petitioner refused to do so and rather he snatched his answer book and the incriminating material from the hands of the member of the flying squad, tored the answer book and the incriminating material into pieces and tried to destroy the torn material. The members of the flying squad, however, managed to procure the torn material forcibly from the petitioner. The petitioner misbehaved with the members of the flying squad and threatened them with dire consequences. The torn material was forwarded to the Kurukshetra University for taking the necessary action against the petitioner. Apart from it, the police was requested to register FIR against the petitioner and he was also brought to the police station in custody by the police personnel posted on duty at the said examination centre.

The grounds on which the petitioner seeks the quashing of the FIR are as under :

The allegations mentioned in the FIR are vague, criptic, unreliable, unnatural, fabricated and concocted and no offence even, prima facie, was made out by the bare perusal of the FIR. There was no mention of the serial number of the alleged answer book and the details regarding the number of pages of the same. Likewise, the number of pages and other necessary details of the incriminating material have also not been given in the FIR. The serial number of the second answerbook, allegedly given to the petitioner, was also not given in the FIR. It was further mentioned in the petition that the petitioner actually tore out the material and as such ingredients of Section 201 IPC are missing. Similarly, ingredients of Section 406 IPC are also missing as there are no allegations against the petitioner that he took away the alleged answer book from the examination centre or in any way misappropriated the same for his personal use in any manner, whatsoever. Even the ingredients of Section 189 IPC are alleged to be missing simply by alleging that the petitioner misbehaved with the members of the flying squad cannot be said to be sufficient to make out the offence under Section 189 IPC. The names and addresses of the flying squad with whom the petitioner allegedly misbehaved, have not been mentioned. Even otherwise, the truthfulness of the allegations made in the FIR is doubtful because the alleged incident took place at 11.05 a.m. on 27.6.1997, whereas the FIR in question was registered at 5.15 p.m. on the same day, inspite of the fact that the distance of the police post, Bus Stand, Karnal is only 1.00 km. from the Dyal Singh College, Karnal, i.e. the centre of the examination. It is further alleged that the copy of the FIR was received by the Illaqa Magistrate Karnal on the next day, i.e. on 28.6.1997 at 10.00 a.m., whereas the courts and police station, City Karnal are situated at Karnal town itself. The reference was made to sub clause (6) of Clause 32 of the Book of Instructions for Superintendentin Chief, Superintendent and Supervisory Staff, Kurukshetra University, Kurukshetra, regarding collection of answer books which reads as under :

"If a candidate leaves the examination hall without delivering the answer book and takes away the same with him, the centre Superintendent will immediately report the matter to the police as well as to the office of Assistant Registrar (Conduct) Kurukshetra University, Kurukshetra."

The extract of Clause 32 of the Book of Instructions for Superintendentin Chief, Superintendent and Supervisory Staff, K.U. KurukshetraCollection has been placed on record as Annexure P2. It was alleged that these instructions have not been strictly followed by the authorities and, therefore, the FIR cannot be legally sustained and is liable to be quashed.

Apart from it, the petitioner contended that there is another aspect of the matter, which warrants the quashment of the FIR. It is alleged that the regarding unfair means case are pending against the petitioner, initiated by the University authority on the same cause of action and the same have not yet been finalised. As per settled principle of law, no person can be vexed twice for the same cause of action as the double jeopardy is prohibited. The petitioner has annexed true copy of the letter dated 13.11.1997 issued by the Assistant Registrar (Conduct), which is Annexure P3.

It is settled principle of law relating to the quashment of FIR and criminal proceedings including a complaint that the FIR or the complaint or other proceedings sought to be quashed are to be considered on the assumption that the averments made in the FIR/complaint etc. are as mentioned therein and if upon a consideration of those averments commission of offences is, prima facie, shown, then the FIR or complaint would not be quashed.

Apart from it, it may be mentioned that the purpose of lodging the FIR is to intimate the police about the commission of offences in a particular offence. The FIR is not expected to be an encyclopedia containing all the details of a particular offence and it is sufficient that if such particulars have been given in the FIR from which commission of offences can be, prima facie, shown. Moreover, a particular act of a person can attract action on the administrative side and the same may also make him liable for the commission of an offence punishable under the provisions of the Penal Code or any other Act, containing penal provisions. The FIR in such an event will not be quashed because the action of a person can attract administrative action also.

In the instant case, the averments made in the FIR, prima facie, show that the members of the flying squad during a check of the centre, where the petitioner was taking examination in fourth paper in the M.A. (Previous) in Hindi subject, in room No. 9, Dyal Singh College, Karnal, he was detected using unfair means and incriminating material. His answer book and the incriminating material was taken by the members of the flying squad and he was produced before the Superintendent of the centre. It was in the office of the Superintendent Examination that the petitioner is alleged to have snatched his answer book and the incriminating material and tried to destroy the same by tearing into pieces and he also misbehaved with the members of the flying squad. The answer book, which contained the incriminating material, copied from the said material, which was a significant piece was tored into pieces and, prima facie, offence was committed of destruction of the evidence and thereby prima facie commission of offence punishable under Section 201 IPC was made out. The commission of offence punishable under Section 406 IPC was also shown, prima facie and the offence under Section 189 IPC was also shown, prima facie, with the allegation of threat to the members of the flying squad and the authorities.

So far as the compliance of provisions of Clause 32 of the Book of Instructions aforesaid is concerned, it may be mentioned that the same deals with a situation where the candidate leaves the examination hall without delivering the answer book and takes away the same with him. In the instant case, the averments made in the FIR are not to that effect. The averments made in the FIR show that the petitioner along with the answer book and the incriminating material was taken from the examination hall to the office of the Superintendent.

Having carefully considered the various averments made by the petitioner and going through the averments made in the FIR, I am of the considered view that no case for quashing of FIR is made out and the petition, which seeks the quashing of the FIR and the subsequent proceedings, is dismissed in limine, being devoid of any merits.