Malkit Kaur vs State Of Punjab & Others on 18 November, 2008

C.W.P. No.2870 of 2008                                                  -1-


        IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                     AT CHANDIGARH

                                                C.W.P. No.2870 of 2008
                                                Decided on : 18-11-2008

Malkit Kaur
                                                             .... Petitioner
                    VERSUS

State of Punjab & others
                                                          .... Respondents

CORAM:-HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA.

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE NAWAB SINGH.

Present:- Mr. S.S. Goraya, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Sandeep Moudgil, D.A.G, Punjab.

HEMANT GUPTA, J

The petitioner has invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court,

directing the respondents to pay compensation to the petitioner on account

of death of the petitioner in the illegal custody of Police Station, Quadian,

Police District Batala, on 01.10.1991.

It is the case of the petitioner that son of the petitioner namely

Manjit Singh was picked up forcibly on 01.08.1991 from Bus Stand

Quadian, Police District Batala and was kept in illegal custody by the

Police. The petitioner was assured by Munshi Harjit Singh Saini and SHO

Rajbir Singh that her son would be released after interrogation. But on

13.08.1991, when the petitioner went to meet her son, it was informed that

her son has been shifted to some other Police Station and thereafter, the

petitioner has not been able to meet her son. It appears that he has been

eliminated by SHO, Police Station, Quadian while in Police custody. The

petitioner relies upon the telegrams issued on 03.09.1991, 30.09.1991 and

also communication to one Tejinder Singh Ahuja, Advocate on 13.03.1993.
C.W.P. No.2870 of 2008 -2-

The petitioner has also attached a copy of the letter dated 07.10.1996,

written to the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India.

The fact remains that the petitioner has invoked the writ

jurisdiction of this Court after 16 years of the alleged incident. The

respondents in reply, has denied the fact that the son of the petitioner was

ever taken into custody. Long delay on the part of the petitioner, disentitles

the petitioner from invoking the writ jurisdiction of this Court.

Consequently, the present writ petition is dismissed on account of

delay and latches.

                                                    (Hemant Gupta)
                                                        Judge



18th November 2008.                                 (Nawab Singh)
Monika                                                  Judge