CRIMINAL MISC. NO.M 10446 OF 1999 :{ 1 }:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
DATE OF DECISION: AUGUST 27, 2008
Aslam
.....Petitioner
VERSUS
State of Punjab and others
....Respondents
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH
1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement?
2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?
PRESENT: None for the petitioner.
Mr. Mehardeep Singh, AAG, Punjab,
for the State.
****
RANJIT SINGH, J. (ORAL)
Long ago in the year 1999, Mr.R.L.Anand, J., during his
visit to Moga Sub Jail, had come across a prisoner who showed his
injuries, alleging that these were caused to him by burn at the hands
of SI Ajmer Singh, respondent No.2. Hon’ble Judge had then issued
direction to the Deputy Commissioner as well as Senior
Superintendent of Police to ensure proper treatment to the said
CRIMINAL MISC. NO.M 10446 OF 1999 :{ 2 }:
person, who has filed the present petition, seeking direction for
registration of a case against the police officials who were allegedly
responsible for causing injuries to him while he was in their custody.
The Court had also called for the report from Deputy Commissioner
and Senior Superintendent of Police, Moga, in regard to the action
that they had taken in the matter. Both the officers were directed to
furnish their explanation to the Court. The copy of the said order
dated 21.4.1999 was sent to the Deputy Commissioner and S.S.P.,
Moga.
Unfortunately, the case could not be taken up thereafter
till 4.8.2008. On this date, this Court found that no response has
been received, as required vide order dated 21.4.1999. Taking
serious view of the lapse on the part of the officials in not responding
to the directions issued by this Court, Deputy Commissioner and
S.S.P., Moga, were required to file response within 10 days. It was
directed that if they failed to file response, then they would remain
present before the Court on the date fixed. The case again could
not be taken up on 17.7.2008, to which date, it was adjourned, till it
has come up for hearing today.
Learned State counsel today submits that separate
replies/response by Deputy Commissioner and S.S.P., Moga, had
been received in the office of Advocate General, Punjab, within time,
but could not be placed on record as the case did not come up for
hearing. Learned counsel has placed before this Court the said
replies dated 16.7.2008. Both the replies are taken on record.
A perusal of the replies filed by D.S.P. (City), Moga,
CRIMINAL MISC. NO.M 10446 OF 1999 :{ 3 }:
would show that the petitioner herein was shifted to Civil Hospital,
Moga, for treatment on 19.3.1999. He was also released on bail. The
petitioner thereafter left the hospital of his own without giving any
intimation. He was accused of being involved in 8 criminal cases of
theft, robbery and attempting to dacoity. As per the reply, the
petitioner apparently had gone underground to avoid prosecution in
the cases pending against him. It is further disclosed that on the
basis of a complaint made by the petitioner, FIR No.101 dated
19.6.1999, under Sections 330, 342 and 323 IPC was registered at
Police Station City, Moga, against SI Ajmer Singh and ASI Lakhbir
Singh. The investigation in this case was conducted by DSP (City),
Moga. The petitioner was also joined in investigation. Ultimately, both
the police officials were found innocent and cancellation report was
submitted. It is also disclosed in the reply that after joining the
investigation of the case on 4.4.2000, the petitioner died in a road
accident on 6.4.2000. The death certificate of the petitioner is
enclosed with the reply.
No one has appeared to represent the petitioner in the
present case The prayer in the present petition was for registration of
a case against the respondents, who were responsible for torturing
the petitioner. Since the case was registered and investigated in the
year 2000 and cancellation report submitted, the prayer made in the
petition obviously is rendered infructuous. I would have been inclined
to pass further orders in regard to cancellation report submitted by
police but am desisting from doing so in view of the fact that the
present petitioner is no more and as such, no useful purpose will be
CRIMINAL MISC. NO.M 10446 OF 1999 :{ 4 }:
served in further pursuing the issue arising out of the complaint made
by late petitioner.
The present petition is accordingly disposed of as
infructuous.
August 27,2008 ( RANJIT SINGH ) khurmi JUDGE