Harnek Singh vs State Of Punjab And Others on 19 January, 2009

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                         AT CHANDIGARH


               Criminal Misc. No. M-24323 of 2008 (O&M)
                   Date of decision: 19th January, 2009


Harnek Singh

                                                              ... Petitioner

                                 Versus

State of Punjab and others
                                                          ... Respondents


CORAM:      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA


Present:    Mr. P.P.S. Duggal, Advocate for the petitioner.

            Mr. Anter Singh Brar, Deputy Advocate General Punjab for the
            State.


KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. (ORAL)

Harnek Singh petitioner has stated that his son Surjit Singh

was working at the shop of Commission Agent. He went out of the house

on 20th September, 2006 and had not returned in the night. Petitioner

suspected that it is a case of murder and one lady, Amarjit Kaur, resident

of village Kaccherbhan is responsible for the murder.

Notice of motion was issued. A status report has been filed by

the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Govt. Railway Police, Ferozepur. It

was concluded by the Investigating Officer that death of the deceased was

found to be due to his striking against the railway engine and persons

named in the application by the petitioner on the basis of suspicion was

found to be innocent.

Criminal Misc. No. M-24323 of 2008 (O&M) 2

From the facts of this case, it emerges that the Area Judicial

Magistrate, under Section 190(1)(c) Cr.P.C. is competent to redress the

grievance of the petitioner.

File of the present case be sent to the Area Judicial Magistrate

(1st Class) who shall form an opinion whether to proceed in the present

case under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. or 190 (1)(c) Cr.P.C.

Section 190(1)(a) of the Code of Criminal Procedure vests

power in the Magistrate to proceed in accordance with law when such

complaint has been received and also Section 190(1)(c) to proceed when

any information has been received from any person other than a police

officer or upon his own knowledge that such offence has been committed.

Section 156 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure empowers

any Magistrate to order investigation as has been envisaged under Section

156 Cr.P.C.

Section 2(g) of Cr.P.C. defines inquiry as under:

“inquiry” means every inquiry, other than a trial,
conducted under this Code by a Magistrate or Court;”

Furthermore, Section 2(h) defines investigation, which also

reads as under:

“investigation” includes all the proceedings under this
Code for the collection of evidence conducted by a police
officer or by any person (other than a Magistrate) who is
authorized by a Magistrate in this behalf.”

After this file is received by the Judicial Magistrate (1st Class),

he shall formulate his own opinion in this case to find out whether any

offence has been committed and inquiry is to be conducted or an

investigation is called for. Area Judicial Magistrate (1st Class) shall also
Criminal Misc. No. M-24323 of 2008 (O&M) 3

peruse the inquiry report and shall find out whether any action is called for

or not.

The Code of Criminal Procedure vests ample powers in the

Area Judicial Magistrate (1st Class) to redress the grievances of the

petitioner.

With these observations, present petition is disposed off.

[KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA]
JUDGE
January 19, 2009
rps