HC quashes FIR, summoning order against AAP’s Pathanmajra in false affidavit case
Justice Dahiya asserted that all the alleged offences were non-cognisable, and therefore police could not have registered an FIR or conducted an investigation without prior permission of a Magistrate
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has quashed an FIR and the subsequent summoning order against AAP leader Harmeet Singh Pathanmajra. He was accused of furnishing false information in his election affidavit.
Allowing the petition, Justice Tribhuvan Dahiya ruled that the lodging of the FIR as well as passing of the summoning order were apparently without jurisdiction. Pathanmajra was represented in the case by counsel Sunny Saggar.
The petitioner had moved the court seeking quashing of FIR registered on February 10, 2022, at the Julkan police station in Patiala district, under the provisions of the IPC and the Representation of the People Act. Directions were also sought to quashing the order dated April 13, 2023, passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patiala, “treating the complaint of Returning Officer as a complaint case against the petitioner”.
The bench was told that the FIR was registered on the basis of a letter by the Returning Officer of the Sanour Assembly constituency, from where Pathanmajra had contested the Assembly election as an AAP candidate, alleging that false information was furnished in Form-26 affidavit accompanying the nomination papers.
Justice Dahiya asserted that all the alleged offences were non-cognisable, and therefore police could not have registered an FIR or conducted an investigation without prior permission of a Magistrate. “As per mandatory procedure laid down under Section 155 of the CrPC, investigation for such offences could not have been carried out by the police by lodging the aforementioned FIR without an order of the Magistrate passed under sub-section (2) of Section 155 CrPC. Resultantly, lodging of the FIR as well as the investigation carried out was without jurisdiction,” the court observed.
The court further found fault with the Magistrate’s decision to take cognisance of the matter. “Also, the CJM could not have taken cognisance of the complaint filed by the Returning Officer which was addressed to the DSP and not to the Magistrate. Accordingly, the impugned order, dated April 13, 2023, summoning the petitioner is without jurisdiction.”
Justice Dahiya added it was apparent that lodging of the FIR as well as passing of the summoning order was without jurisdiction. “Accordingly, the petition is allowed, and FIR, along with all subsequent proceedings, as also the summoning order, dated April 13, 2023, passed by the Magistrate, are hereby quashed qua the petitioner.”
