Amrik Singh vs S.K.Asthana on 11 February, 2009

COCP No. 1552 of 2006                                  1

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                     CHANDIGARH
                                                        COCP 1552 of 2006
                                        Date of decision: February 11, 2009
Amrik Singh
                                                           .....PETITIONER
                                  Versus
S.K.Asthana, SSP, Patiala
                                                        .....RESPONDENT

CORAM:      HON'BLE MR JUSTICE T.P.S.MANN

PRESENT: Mr Navkesh Singh, Advocate
         for the petitioner.

Mr M.C.Berry, Additional Advocate General, Punjab
for the respondent.

T.P.S.MANN, J. (Oral):

According to the petitioner, the respondent did not decide the

representation submitted by the petitioner despite the order passed by this

Court on March 13, 2008.

Reply has been filed by the respondent. It has been stated

therein that after receipt of the order dated March 13, 2008, the respondent

directed the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Patran to enquire into the

complaint of the petitioner. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Patran

returned the papers with the request that the investigation was being

conducted by the Superintendent of Police (Detective), Patiala.

Accordingly, the Superintendent of Police (Detective), Patiala was asked to

enquire into the complaint, who recommended that the FIR had been got

registered falsely by the petitioner. Accordingly, it was recommended that

un-trace report be prepared and sent to the Court concerned. The enquiry

report submitted by the Superintendent of Police (Detective), Patiala was

examined by the respondent, who then came to the conclusion that the same

was in order. The enquiry report was, accordingly, approved and un-trace
COCP No. 1552 of 2006 2

report prepared and submitted in the Court of Ilaqa Magistrate. During the

pendency of the same, the petitioner opposed the un-trace report by stating

that he did not agree with the investigation conducted by the police.

However, on account of the fact that a private complaint had already been

filed by the petitioner, learned Ilaqa Magistrate ordered that the cancellation

report be attached with the complaint case. The complaint is now pending

before the learned trial Court for 24.2.2009.

In view of the above, there is no merit in the petition, which is,

accordingly, dismissed. Rule is discharged.

February 11, 2009                                  (T.P.S.MANN)
Pds.                                                 JUDGE