CRM-M-15706 CRM-M CRM-M CRM-M CRM-M Present: Dr M M M M M M fo 15706-2023 with connected matters ! # * M-15706-2023 -!#"(" M-14540-2023 . -!#"(" M-22450-2023 -!#"(" M-24972-2023 -!#"(" Dr. Anmol Rattan Sidhu, Senior A Mr. Pratham Sethi, Advocate, Ms. Sandhya Gaur, Advocate, Mr. Varun Sharma, Advocate, Mr. Kanishk Swaroop, Advocate, Ms. Kritima Sareen, Advocate Mr. Raghav Gulati, Advocate for the petitioner(s). atters -1- !"!#$!%&' / #&'&(')!%&' / *+&,%!%&' / 0!1212&'!#3"4 0!"*&'%!'13"4 0!1212&'!#3"4 0!"*&'%!'13"4 0!1212&'!#3"4 0!"*&'%!'13"4 0!1212&'!#3"4 0!"*&'%!'13"4 - Advocate with te, Aman Dua 2025.11.29 11:01 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this judicial document CRM-M-15706 M M M - Th common allega decided togethe 2. Fo 2023, which Procedure, 197 10.01.2020, un 1860 (for shor Station North arising therefro Cr.P.C., dated 3. Th with co accuse thus: CH St Aa ga th in Pa (2 SI M NA 15706-2023 with connected matters Mr. Manish Bansal, Public Prosec Mr.Viren Sibal, Additional Public Mr.Rajiv Vij, Additional Public Pr The aforementioned petitions ar egations against the petitioners; ac ther. For brevity, the facts have been has been filed under Section 973 (for short, Cr.P.C.), seeking under Section 147, 149, 332 and hort, IPC) (offence under Section Sector 3, Chandigarh, along with efrom, including the final report/c 15.07.2021, the petitioners. The FIR in question has been lodg used; its translated version, as rep Statement of L/C Manpre CHD, AGE 30 YEARS, stated th Station 03 CHD. Today in conn Aadmi Party (Branch Punjab), I w gate of MLA HOSTEL SEC 4 CH that the workers of Aam Aadmi in the ground of MLA HOSTEL Party's leaders, MP & MLAs (1) (2) HARPAL SINGH CHEEM SINGH, (4) BALJINDER KAU MANJIT SINGH BILASPURI, NARINDER SINGH SHER GILL atters -2- ecutor, U.T., Chandigarh. lic Prosecutor, U.T., Chandigarh. Prosecutor, U.T., Chandigarh. arise out of one FIR involving accordingly, the same are being en noticed from CRM-M-15706- 482 of the Code of Criminal quashing of FIR no.0001 dated nd 353 of the Indian Penal Code, on 188 IPC was deleted), Police ith all consequential proceedings rt/chargesheet under Section 173 rs. dged against the petitioners along reproduced in the petition, reads preet Kaur 4546/CP PS 03 UT that I am posted as L/C at Police nnection with the rally of Aam was posted on DUTY at the exit CHD. Time was around 01:00 PM Party (Branch Punjab) gathered EL SEC 4 PB and Aam Aadmi BHAGWANT SINGH MANN, MA, (3) MASTER BALDEV AUR, (5) MEET HAYER, (6) RI, (7), AMAN ARORA, (8) ILL, (9) JAI SINGH RODI, (10) ng ng - al ed , ce gs 73 ng ds T ce m xit M ed mi N, V 6) 8) 0) Aman Dua 2025.11.29 11:01 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this judicial document CRM-M-15706 SA an sh fo Sh M SH SI IN ba ga th be un th de ca RE th Cr by in th ba or on sta fro SI su co an ha M 15706-2023 with connected matters SARABJIT MANUKA by addre and inciting them to surround th shouting slogans of Punjab Gove forward towards the exit gate car Sh. Vinit Kumar IPS, SP CITY, MAGISTRATE, SHRI KRISHAN SHRI JASPAL SINGH SHO P SINGH, INSP. GURJEET KAUR INSP. RAM RATTAN and the barricading by maintaining LA gathering coming from the front them that your gathering is again been allowed by DM CHD S unconstitutional, therefore, don't t the barricade, whatever your de demand letter to the government can take your demand letter and RESIDENCE because assembly than Rally Ground SEC 25 CHD Cr.P.C. At around 2:30 PM on b by the above said leaders of Aam including all the above said leade the police force deployed on the s barricading, they started moving orders of the DUTY MAGISTRA on the above said furious mob, started pelting stones on the po from me, SHRI KRISHAN SDPO SINGH 312/CHG, and CT VINI sustained injuries. That my me conducted and legal action shoul and workers of Aam Aadmi Par has been recorded, read out, h MANPREET KAUR D.O.B 03 atters -3- dressing about 750/800 workers the CM PUNJAB residence and overnment Murdabad, they came carrying banners and flags, where SHRI RAJIV TIWARI DUTY AN KUMAR SDPO CENTRAL, PS 03 CHD, INSP. MALKIT UR, INSP. POONAM DILAWRI, the entire force were posted at AW ORDER. They asked the ont to stop at barricade and told ainst the law as the same has not Sahib. That your gathering is try to move forward by crossing demand letter is, you can give and 2/3 of your representatives walk with us to CM PUNJAB of more than 05 persons other D is violation under Section 144 being instigated and encouraged m Aadmi Party, 750/800 workers aders started pushing and shoving spot and while trying to destroy forward. Then according to the ATE, water was lightly showered then the furious mob suddenly police force, during which apart PO CENTRAL, INSP MALKIT NIT KUMAR 304/CP have also medical examination should be ould be taken against the leaders arty (Branch Punjab). Statement heard and is correct. Sd/ L/C 03 03 1988 PS 03 CHD DATE rs nd e re Y L, IT I, at he ld ot is ng ve es B er 44 ed rs ng oy he ed ly art IT so be rs nt /C E Aman Dua 2025.11.29 11:01 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this judicial document CRM-M-15706 10 SA Po of m an Po 3.1. As injuries suffere In S 1 2 3 4 In in S 1 2 3 In S 1 2 3 4 5 15706-2023 with connected matters 10.01.2020, МОВ. NO.950116 SATISH KUMAR PS 03 CHD DA Police Proceedings:…From the co offence u/s’s 147, 149, 332, 353 made out. Therefore, for registrat and workers of Aam Aadmi Party Police Station by hand by C. SATY As per the Medico Legal Repor ered by the officials have been decl In case of complainant, Manpreet Sr. No. Injuries 1 Red abrasion over right c 2 Red abrasion over middle 3 Red abrasion over index 4 Pain and Swelling pres (Advised ortho consultati In case of Krishan Kumar, Sub injuries are: Sr. No. Injuries 1 Red abrasion over left h approx 2x1 cm. Swell movement. (Advised X Oblique, Ortho consultati 2 C/o pain in jaw left sid (Advised Dental consulta 3 C/o Pain in left shoulde (Advised X ray left sh Ortho consultation) In case of Malkit Singh, Inspector Sr. No. Injuries 1 Red abrasion over both h approx 2x1 cm. 2 C/o pain in right shoul consultation) 3 Red abrasion over neck o 4 C/o pain in left elbo consultation) 5 Alleged history of human Category one. atters -4- 164192 ATTESTED BY ASI DATE 10.01.2020. contents of statement prima facie 53, 188 of IPC was found to be tration of the case against leaders rty, the statement is being sent to TYWAN 4706/CP. orts (MLRs), Annexure P 3, the eclared simple in nature. Kaur, the injuries are: Marked cheek. No dle finger of right hand. No finger of right hand. No. resent over right hand. tation) No ub Divisional Police Officer, the Marked hand middle finger of elling present. Painful X ray left hand AP tation). No side. Swelling present. ltation) No lder, Painful movement. shoulder AP Lateral, No. tor, the injuries are: Marked hands dorsal surface of No oulder. (Advised Ortho No of approx 1x1 cm. No lbow. (Advised ortho No an bite of left forearm. No SI ie be rs to he he Aman Dua 2025.11.29 11:01 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this judicial document CRM-M-15706 In S 1 2 3.2. Af 15.07.2021, An under Sections the orders date the Deputy Co under Section 4. In petitioners con to the petitione and other polic parts of the bo absence of any prevented the demonstration, political party organised agai had the fundam It is also con commission of lawfully promu only to evade offence been 15706-2023 with connected matters In case of Vineet, the injuries are: Sr. No. Injuries 1 C/o pain in right hand. wrist AP view, Ortho con 2 C/o pain in back of n cervical spine, Ortho cons After completion of the investigat Annexure P 2, was presented in th ns 147, 149, 332 and 353 of IPC. ated 10.01.2020 under Section 144 Commissioner. And on the advic 188 IPC was deleted from the ca In this factual background, lea ontends that no overt act or injury oners. Even otherwise, the injurie lice officials are either abrasions, body which have been declared s any order under Section 144 Cr.P he petitioners from protesting p , nor could the assembly of pe be termed as unlawful assembl ainst the hike in electricity tariffs amental right to protest under Arti ontended that genesis of the c of offence under Section 188 IPC mulgated by a public servant, but i the mandatory procedure unde there, the Court could not have atters -5- re: Marked (Advised X ray right onsultation) No neck (Advised X ray onsultation) No gation, challan/chargesheet, dated the Court against the petitioners C. The chargesheet recorded that 44 Cr.P.C. had not been issued by vice of District Attorney, offence case. learned senior counsel for the ry has been specifically attributed ries suffered by the complainant ns, swellings or pains in different simple in nature. Further, in the r.P.C., the police could not have peacefully or carrying out the persons/protestors/workers of the bly. The protest march had been iffs by the Government, and they rticle 19(1)(a) of the Constitution. case against the petitioners is IPC, i.e., disobeyance to an order it has been deleted from the FIR der Section 195 Cr.P.C. Had the ave taken cognizance against the ed rs at by ce he ed t nt he ve he he en ey n. is r IR he he Aman Dua 2025.11.29 11:01 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this judicial document CRM-M-15706 petitioners exc provisions of complaint agai could not have contention, lea judgments in 293 and contended tha (under Section servant from d against the peti 5. Le petitioners alo protest which obstructed from resulting the in chargesheet. B intention to ob under Sections also, the FIR c The provisions investigation, cognizance by v. 15706-2023 with connected matters xcept on a complaint by a publi of Section 195(1)(a) Cr.P.C., a gainst them. This deletion is there ve been implicated in other/remain learned senior counsel has reli v. v. , (1 that essential ingredients of th ion 332) and assault or use of cr discharge of his duty (under S etitioners. Learned Public Prosecutors, on th along with other protestors were had turned unruly. The police rom performing their duties; the injuries to them, as established b By instigating the crowd, the obstruct and assault the police o ns 332 and 353 IPC are clearly m cannot be quashed because Sect ns of Section 195 Cr.P.C. are and its compliance is require by the Court. This has been settled , (1998) ,(2003) 11 SCC atters -6- blic servant as laid down by the and undisputably there is no erefore illegal, and the petitioners aining offences. In support of the elied upon the Supreme Court , AIR 1953 SC 1981) 2 SCC 185. Lastly, it is the offence of causing hurt criminal force to deter a public Section 353), are not made out the contrary, contended that the re leading an unlawful political ice personnel and officials were they were pushed and assaulted, by the MLRs attached with the petitioners formed a common officials on duty. The offences made out as per the allegations; ection 188 IPC has been deleted. re not attracted at the stage of ired only at the time of taking led by the Supreme Court in 2 SCC 391, ! v. CC 251, and " # v. he no rs he rt C is rt lic ut he al re d, he on es ; d. of ng v. v. Aman Dua 2025.11.29 11:01 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this judicial document CRM-M-15706 $ %!& grounds of cha 6. Su considered. 7. On of mandatory given rise to th ( 19 th se of ( 19 7.1. Re considered enti upon by learn and ! statedly comm Cr.P.C., like th other offences category of o mandatory pro these two categ possible to spl offence requir 15706-2023 with connected matters !&$ " ' , 2025 hallenge put forth by the petitioner Submissions made by learned cou One of the questions raised before procedure laid down under Se the following two issues: ) Requirement to follow the pro 195 Cr.P.C. when there are comp the offences for which procedu section, as well as other offences of this mandated procedure; ) The stage when compliance 195 Cr.P.C. is mandated. Recently, the Supreme Court ntire law on the issues aforementio rned counsel for the parties !. On issue () it held mitted offences, (i) which fall w the ones punishable under Sectio es which do not fall under its scop offences can be launched sepa rocedure laid down under Section tegories of offences form part of th split up the same, the State canno uiring mandatory procedure und atters -7- 25 1NSC 1009. Accordingly, the ners are not sustainable. counsel for the parties have been ore the Court relate to compliance Section 195 Cr.P.C., which has rocedure laid down under Section mposite allegations pertaining to dure has been mandated in the es which are beyond the restrains of the procedure under Section rt in " # case, ntioned, including the cases relied ( ( eld that in case the accused have within the scope of Section 195 tions 172 to 188 IPC, (ii) as also ope, the prosecution for the latter eparately without following the ion 195 Cr.P.C. However, in case the same transaction and it is not nnot be permitted to exclude the under Section 195 Cr.P.C. and he en ce as on to he ns on se, ed ve 95 so er he se ot he nd Aman Dua 2025.11.29 11:01 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this judicial document CRM-M-15706 prosecute the cannot be perm rigors of Sectio thus are as und 41 up no wi pr co ot re fa of ju Se th ju in po tra co tra of wr m Se th th Se es wo di 15706-2023 with connected matters accused for the remaining cogn rmitted to be adopted as it is only tion 195 Cr.P.C. The relevant para nder: 41. While deciding whether th up, courts must remain circumspe not that once the facts of a given within the scope of Section 195 C prosecution can be launched rega complaint of the court or the lawf otherwise would be to extend the regions and horizons not contem facts in a case may give rise offences against the authority of p justice, as also offences against pr Section 195 of the Cr.P.C. canno the offences other than those aga justice. Prosecution for such othe instrumentality of the public aut position may be different when transaction offences falling wi committed. In such cases, it may transaction, and to hold that ther offences not mentioned in Section written complaint of the public au may be. Courts must be able to se Section 195 of the Cr.P.C. nugato the transaction by verbal jugglery the offence alleged falls within Section 195, the operation of the essence the alleged offence falls would not operate. At the same distinct offences, some attracting atters -8- gnizable offences. Such a course ly for the purpose of avoiding the aragraphs of the judgment holding the distinct offences can be split spect. It is agreed that, the law is case disclose an offence falling Cr.P.C. and also other offences, egarding the latter only upon the wful authority concerned. To hold scope of Section 195 Cr.P.C. to emplated by the legislature. The to distinct offences including public servants or against public private individuals; the bar under not, in such circumstances, affect against public authority or public ther offences does not require the authority or court. However, the during the course of the same within the two categories are ay not be possible to split up the here can be valid prosecution for ion 195 of the Cr.P.C. without the authority or the court, as the case see through any attempt to render atory by hiding the real nature of ery. If in principle and substance hin the categories mentioned in the bar cannot be avoided; if in lls outside the categories, the bar e time, if the facts give rise to ing the operation of Section 195 se he ng lit is ng es, he ld to he ng lic er ct lic he he e re he or he se er of ce in in ar to 95 Aman Dua 2025.11.29 11:01 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this judicial document CRM-M-15706 an an 42 co ca sp tra an an of se in th in re in co 7.2. Fu created under mentioned in C by a public ser police. Therefo section is when at the time of judgment are re 48 th wh fu Se vi Co 15706-2023 with connected matters and others not so, the bar can ope and not regarding the latter. 42. Therefore, the courts must course of a single transaction, the categories are committed, in whic split up the offences or, whe transactions which occur succes and distinctively, in which case th another aspect that may be looked offences committed in contempt servants, or against public justice in evidence which fall under the the other distinct offences are individuals are aggrieved. In suc reasonable to bar a private p individual for the reason that th concerned has also not instituted a Further, on issue () the Suprem Section 195 Cr.P.C. is on taki Chapter XIV of the Code in the servant, and not on registration o efore, the stage of complying with hen cognizance of the offence is to lodging the FIR. In this regard relevant: 48. Thus, in view of the above, the effect that there must be a co who was voluntarily obstructed functions. The complaint must be Section 195 Cr.P.C. are mandator vitiate the prosecution and all o Court cannot assume the cogniza atters -9- operate only regarding the former ust ascertain whether during the he offences falling within both the hich case it would be difficult to hether there are two different essively, nevertheless separately the offences may be split up. One ed into is whether, apart from the pt of lawful authority of public ce or, relating to documents given he scope of Section 195 Cr.P.C., of such a nature that private such a scenario, it would not be prosecution by the aggrieved the public official or the court a complaint. me Court laid down that the bar aking cognizance of the offences absence of complaint in writing or investigation of a case by the ith the procedure mandated in the to be taken by the Court, and not the following paragraphs of the ve, the law can be summarized to complaint by the public servant in the discharge of his public be in writing. The provisions of tory. Non compliance of it would other consequential orders. The izance of the case without such er he he to nt ly ne he lic en ., te be ed rt ar s ng he he ot he to nt lic of ld he ch Aman Dua 2025.11.29 11:01 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this judicial document CRM-M-15706 co co 49 50 Pr Th th Th em of co pr 51 in pu co ot Th co is ag po co of 8. Fi whether the FI Cr.P.C. and lia against the pet been split up b are two inter r offence under 15706-2023 with connected matters complaint. In the absence of su conviction will be void ab initio be 49. xxx xxx xxx 50. The heading of Chapter X Procedure is "Conditions Requisit The first provision in this Chapter the power of the Magistrate to ta There are some other provisions embargo on the power of the offences committed by persons en complaint in writing of certain previous sanction of certain specif 51. A plain reading of Sectio indicate that no Court can tak punishable under Section 186 complaint in writing of the public other public servant to whom he The opening words of the Sect cognizance", and consequently, th is against taking of cognizance against the registration of a crimin police agency or submission o completion of the investigation, a of the Cr.P.C. Firstly, in the facts of the instant FIR in question is in violation of liable to be quashed as such; and petitioners arise out of the same by the investigating agency to lo related issues; in case splitting Section 188 was wrong, the co atters -10- such a complaint, the trial and being without jurisdiction. XIV of the Code of Criminal isite for Initiation of Proceedings". ter is Section 190 and it deals with take cognizance of the offences. in this Chapter which create an Court to take cognizance of enumerated therein except on the specified persons or with the cified authorities. ction 195 of the Cr.P.C. would take cognizance of an offence of the I.P.C, except upon a lic servant concerned or of some is administratively subordinate. ection are "No Court shall take the bar created by the provisions by the Court. There is no bar minal case or investigation by the of a report by the police on as contemplated by Section 173 cases, it is to be examined as to of provisions of Section 195(1)(a) and whether the offences alleged transaction and could not have lodge the FIR in question. These up the offences by deleting the consequential requirement would nd al s". ith es. an of he he ld ce a e te. ke ns ar he on 73 to a) ed ve se he ld Aman Dua 2025.11.29 11:01 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this judicial document CRM-M-15706 be to comply w of the settled compliance is Magistrate, and compliance wi of the FIR by th 9. Se for the petition petitioners eve that a commission of allegations, the (AAP) worker Minister at Cha a gathering o notification iss petitioners, bei the party worke On shooting of During all this, 15.07.2021, ha 149, 332 and involvement of after identifica supplementary could not be id 15706-2023 with connected matters with the mandatory procedure un led proposition of law, as afo to be seen at the time of taking and that stage has not reached yet with the provisions of this section the petitioners. Secondly, it needs examination, a tioners, whether any ) * ven if the allegations are taken an FIR can be quashed if it of any of the alleged offences the petitioners have been part of kers moving towards official re handigarh. The police had barrica of more than five persons in issued under Section 144 Cr.P.C being leaders of the group of peo rkers and all of them started pushin of water on them the furious mob is, some of the officials sustained as been presented against the p and 353 IPC, without disclosin of the petitioners in the offences ation of the accused/petitioners ry challan will be given. Therefo identified. atters -11- under Section 195(1)(a). In terms aforementioned, the procedural ing cognizance of offences by the yet. Therefore, the perceived non ion is no ground to seek quashing as contended by learned counsel * case is made out against the to be true. It is no longer does not ) * disclose ces by the accused. As per the of a protest of + + residence of the Punjab Chief icaded the road and told them that the city was in violation of .C. It is further alleged that the eople protesting there, instigated hing and shoving the police force. ob suddenly started pelting stones. injuries. The chargesheet, dated petitioners under Sections 147, sing any material establishing ces alleged. Besides, it states that and 750 800 workers of AAP, efore, concededly the petitioners s ral he ng el he se he ief at of he ed . . ed 7, ng at , rs Aman Dua 2025.11.29 11:01 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this judicial document CRM-M-15706 9.1. T marching ahea prohibitory ord been named fro the police forc do so. The nat mentioned; no them. Therefor by the mob to has been attrib shooting mild officials presen behaving the w of the Duty M abrasions, pain by the mob in failed to come petitioners in * 353 IPC to , * voluntarily cau servants from officials also d result of grapp there is no alle 15706-2023 with connected matters There was no reason for the pol head towards the Chief Minist order under Section 144 Cr.P.C. ha from amongst the persons present rce. Besides, it is not the case tha nature of alleged instigation by th nor have specific words or gesture fore, there is no basis to ascribe the the petitioners. It is a case where tributed to the petitioners. Instea ld water on the mob they started sent there. The immediate trigger way it did, appears to be shooting Magistrate. The nature of injurie ain and swelling which could be th in an effort to push its way ahead me up with any material indica this regard as well. Section 33 )* # * * * ’. The petitioners have n ausing any assault, hurt or using c m discharging duties. The natur dispels any role of the petitione appling and pushing, as discussed allegation that the protesters were atters -12- olice to stop the protestors from ister’s residence, as admittedly had not been issued. Nobody has nt who allegedly pelted stones on that the petitioners asked them to the petitioners has also not been res of any kind been attributed to the alleged act of throwing stones ere no act, voluntary or otherwise, tead, the allegations are that on rted pelting stones which hit the for the mob turning furious and ing of water on them as per orders ries suffered by the officials are, the result of shoving and jostling ead. The investigating agency has icating any definite role to the 332 IPC pertains to ,# * -( and Section * )* # not been specifically accused of criminal force to deter the public ture of injuries suffered by the ners, as the same appear to be a sed hereinbefore. More so, when ere armed or carrying any sticks, m ly as on to en to es , on he nd s re, ng as he on of lic he a en s, Aman Dua 2025.11.29 11:01 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this judicial document CRM-M-15706 stones, etc. Fu offence is defin . * ) * the offences un not the respond was unlawful, issued. Conseq to have been m 10. In dated 10.01.20 subsequent pro 11. A / + 15706-2023 with connected matters Further, Section 147 IPC provide efined under Section 146 to mean . ( * ’. Section * * * * * ( * ’. Evidently, unlawful a under Sections 146 and 149 IPC. ondent’s case that the assembly of ul, as the prohibitory orders und sequently, ingredients of none of t made out against any of the petitio In view of the discussion, these pe .2020 and chargesheet/final repo roceedings, are hereby quashed A photocopy of this order be place ) / ) atters -13- ides punishment for rioting. The an ‘. # * # * ( # ion 149 IPC is to the effect, ‘ . ( 0 # ) .( ( assembly is the for And in the instant petitions it is of protesters which used the force nder Section 144 had not been the offences alleged can be said itioners even ) * . petitions are allowed. FIR no. 01, port dated 15.07.2021, with all the petitioners. aced on the connected files. 3- 4 1 1 he ( or is ce en id , all 4 Aman Dua 2025.11.29 11:01 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this judicial document