Ravinder Chauhan vs State of Haryana

V.K. Jhanji, J.

The present petition has been filed under Section 482, Criminal Procedure Code, for quashing FIR No. 103 dated 21.5.1991, P.S. Panchkula,

under Section 409 IPC and Section 134 of People Representation Act, 1951.

The brief facts, as set out in the petition, are that the petitioner was appointed as Presiding Officer in Polling Booth No. 102, Panchkula, during

the Parliamentary and Assembly Elections held on 20.5.1991. At the close of the polling on 20.5.1991, petitioner duly sealed the two ballotboxes

and went to deposit the same with the Sub Divisional Officer (Civil)cumReturning Officer, Kalka, where he placed the three boxes (one empty and

two containing ballots) on the table placed at the door of the strongroom where the same being received for being kept in the strongroom. As the

boxes from all over the constituency were being deposited there, there was a great rush and in the melee, somebody standing in the queue gave a

push from behind, as a result of which, the table on which the ballotboxes were lying, overturned and the boxes fell down on the floor of the

strongroom. One of the ballotboxes was mistakenly removed by the helpers of the Returning Officer and taken inside the strongroom before it was

entered in the record and a receipt was issued to the petitioner. In spite of repeated protestation of the petitioner, he was issued receipt only for

two ballotboxes Le. one empty and one full and an F.I.R. was lodged by the S.D.O. (Civil)cumReturning Officer with the Police Station,

Panchkula, bearing FIR No. 103 of 1991 under Section 409 IPC and Section 103 of the People Representation Act. It has further been stated in

the petition that during the counting of votes, it was found that the missing ballotbox pertaining to booth No. 102, Panchkula, was in fact inside the

strongroom. In consequence of the ballotbox having been found inside the strongroom the Sub Divisional Officer (Civil)cumReturning Officer,

wrote to the S.H.O. Police Station, Panchkula for the cancellation of FIR. No. 103 vide his Memo No. 2483/Election/91 dated 17.6.1991. A

Memo to this effect was also written by the Deputy CommissionercumDistrict Electoral Officer, Ambala, to the S.D.O. (Civil,), Panchkula, asking

him to pursue the matter of the cancellation of the F.I.R. and inform him about the same. Petitioner has, thus, prayed in the petition that though as

per the Authorities, the F.I.R. is liable to be cancelled, but no steps have been taken by the Authorities to get the proceedings, going on before the

Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ambala, dropped, with the result that the petitioner is being put to unnecessary harassment.

Notice of the petition was given to the State of Haryana. Despite the opportunity granted, no reply has been filed. At the time of hearing of the

petition, the petitioner referred to Annexure P3, i.e. report submitted by S.H.O. Police Station, Panchkula, that cancellation report in FIR No. 103

of 21.5.1991 was prepared and sent so that the accused may be discharged.

Counsel for the petitioner, thus, contended that in view of the report, the present petition deserves to be allowed.

Having heard the learned Counsel, I am of the view that the criminal proceedings launched against the petitioner are nothing, but an abuse of

process of law. The averments made in the petition make it abundantly clear that petitioner is totally innocent and it was only on account of some

confusion that one ballotbox was taken in the strongroom and receipt for only twoballotboxes was given to the petitioner, whereas he had

deposited all the three ballotboxes. Though the respondents have realised their mistake, yet the petitioner has been unnecessarily harassed.

Consequently, the petition stands allowed with costs which are quantified at Rs. 2,000/. As a consequence thereof, FIR No. 103 of 1991 and

the proceedings before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ambala, in pursuance of the said F.I.R. shall stand quashed.