High Court Punjab-Haryana High Court

Gurbax Singh vs State Of Punjab And Others on 2 March, 2009

Punjab-Haryana High Court
Gurbax Singh vs State Of Punjab And Others on 2 March, 2009
Criminal Misc. No.M-17936 of 2008                 1

       In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh


                     Criminal Misc. No.M-17936 of 2008
                     Date of decision: 2.3.2009


Gurbax Singh
                                                         ......Petitioner
                      Versus


State of Punjab and others
                                                      .......Respondents


CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA


Present:     Mr.Sandeep Arora, Advocate,
              for the petitioner.


              Mr.Aman Deep Singh Rai, AAG, Punjab
              for respondent Nos. 1 to 4 and 6.


              Mr.P.S.Brar, Advocate,
              for respondent No.7.
             Mr.R.S.Dhaliwal, Advocate for respondent No.8.
              ****


SABINA, J.

This petition has been filed by Gurbax Singh under

Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (“Cr.P.C. for short) for

entrustment of investigation of DDR No.32 dated 2.5.2006 registered

at Police Station Sadar Khanna to CBI with the direction for

expeditious and impartial investigation in the matter.

Pritpal Singh, son of the petitioner, was taken away by
Criminal Misc. No.M-17936 of 2008 2

Harjit Singh @ Lakha on 30.4.2006. Thereafter, Pritpal Singh did not

return home and his dead body was recovered on 2.5.2006. On the

basis of the statement of the petitioner, Daily Diary Report was

recorded on 2.5.2006 (Annexure P-5). The grievance of the petitioner

is that despite sufficient evidence, no FIR had been registered

against the culprits because respondent No.7 was a high ranking

police officer.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that all

the inquiries conducted by the various police authorities were merely

an eye wash and the investigation of the case be handed over to

Central Bureau of Investigation.

Learned State counsel, on the other hand, has submitted

that the petitioner had earlier filed a petition and the same was

disposed of with a direction that the investigation be conducted by an

officer of Crime Branch not below the rank of Deputy Superintendent

of Police. The said officer has also found that respondent Nos. 7 to

10 were innocent. Now the petitioner has filed a complaint and the

accused in the said case have been summoned to face the trial.

In CRM-M No.59688 of 2006, filed by the petitioner, a

direction was given to Additional Director General of Police (Crime)

Punjab to entrust the investigation of the case to an officer of Crime

Branch not below the rank of D.S.P. vide order dated 17.7.2007

(Annexure P-13). Thereafter, enquiry was entrusted to

Superintendent of Police of Special Investigation, Crime, Punjab ,
Criminal Misc. No.M-17936 of 2008 3

Chandigarh and he vide his report dated 28.12.2007 (Annexure P-

14) found that Pritpal Singh took liquor and poisonous substance to

commit suicide. No telephone call had been made by DSP

Kashmira Singh (respondent No.7) to the petitioner.

A perusal of the reply filed by the State reveals that

initially the matter was thoroughly investigated by Assistant Sub

Inspector, Chowki Kot, Police Station Sadar, Khanna and his report

in this regard is Annexure R-1. Thereafter, the matter was

investigated by DSP Khanna and his report in this regard is annexed

as Annexure R-2. The matter was again investigated by

Superintendent of Police (D) Khanna and his report is Annexure R-3.

It was found that the son of the petitioner had not been murdered as

alleged by him. Thereafter, on the basis of the order of this Court,

investigation was done by Superintendent of Police of Special

Investigation, Crime, Punjab , Chandigarh. He also found that the

allegations levelled by the petitioner were false.

Admittedly, the petitioner has filed a private complaint

and the accused have been summoned in the said complaint case.

Since the Magistrate is seized of the matter, no interference by this

Court is called for to direct CBI to investigate the matter.

Accordingly, this petition is dismissed.

(SABINA)
JUDGE
March 02, 2009
anita