CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 4536 of 2008 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH.
DATE OF DECISION: May 8, 2009.
Parties Name
Mandeep Kaur
..PETITIONER
VERSUS
State of Punjab and others
...RESPONDENTS
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S.THAKUR, CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH
PRESENT: Mr. R.S. Bains,
Advocate, for the petitioner
Mr. Amol Rattan Singh, Addl. A.G., Punjab,
for respondents No. 1 to 4.
Mr. Vaibhav Narang, Advocate,
for respondent No. 5 .
JASBIR SINGH, J.
JUDGMENT
Petitioner, by filing this writ petition, has prayed that necessary
directions be issued to the official respondents to initiate legal action
against respondent No. 5, who had made an attempt to sexually exploit her.
It is case of the petitioner that she was given appointment, as a
Clerk, in Bir Baba Budha College in District Amritsar, on compassionate
grounds, in the year 1999. After about six months of her appointment, she
was called in the Dera of respondent No. 5, on a telephone and the said
CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 4536 of 2008 2
respondent tried to sexually exploit her. She made a complaint to the wife of
respondent No. 5 but her response was not encouraging. Again in the month
of March, 2002, an attempt was made by respondent No. 5 to outrage her
modesty. She mustered courage and made a complaint to the SHO
concerned on July 15, 2002 (Annexure P-1) and to SSP, TarnTaran on July
23, 2002( Annexure P-2). She also sent copy of the complaint to the
Chairman, Human Rights Commission, Punjab, Chandigarh. She has further
stated that respondent No. 5 is a very powerful person, on account of which
the authorities have failed to take any action against him.
It has come on record that disciplinary action was initiated
against the petitioner in the year 2002.
Upon notice, separate replies have been filed – one by
respondents No. 1,2 and 4 and another by respondent No. 5. Respondent
No. 5 has specifically stated that the petitioner has filed this writ petition at
the instance of the petitioners in Civil Writ Petition No. 17879 of 2007 and
Balkar Singh etc, who were not on good terms with Management of the
College. It is also stated that the petitioner is guilty of concealment of
material facts. Earlier also she had filed Civil Writ Petition No. 11998 of
2002, which was disposed of vide order dated August 5, 2002. Thereafter,
she filed Criminal Misc. No. 33150 of 2002, under Section 482 Cr.P.C.,with
a prayer to investigate into the allegations levelled by her as mentioned
above and to take appropriate action against respondent No. 5. That petition
was disposed of by this Court vide order dated August 8, 2002. Thereafter,
enquiry was conducted on her allegations by senior police officers and
respondent No. 5 was exonerated vide report dated November 12, 2003. By
stating as above, prayer has been made that the writ petition be dismissed.
CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 4536 of 2008 3
After hearing counsel for the parties, we are convinced that by
filing this writ petition, the petitioner is trying to serve some body else’s
interest. It is an admitted fact that Baldev Singh etc. had filed Civil Writ
Petition No. 17879 of 2007 against respondent No. 5 alleging embezzlement
of College property. In this writ petition, it has been contended by
respondent No. 5 that the petitioner has filed this writ petition at the
instance of the petitioners in the that writ petition. We are inclined to agree
with the argument raised above.
It is apparent from the records that the petitioner has agitated
misconduct on the part of respondent No. 5, committed in the year 2002.
Thereafter, twice over, she has come to this Court by making similar prayer,
which has been made in this writ petition. She filed Civil Writ Petition No.
11998 of 2002 and on August 5, 2002, following order was passed by a
Division Bench of this Court:
“Counsel for the petitioner seeks liberty to withdraw the
petition so as to file a fresh petition under Section 482 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure.”
It appears that immediately thereafter she filed Cr. Misc. No.
33150 of 2002 under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with a prayer that directions be
issued to the police officials to look into her grievance and take appropriate
action against respondent No. 5. That application was also disposed of by
this Court vide order dated August 8, 2002, directing SSP concerned to look
into complaint made by the petitioner in her representation dated July 23,
2002. Detailed enquiry was conducted. Matter was even looked into by
higher officers and finding no substance in her complaint, respondent No. 5
CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 4536 of 2008 4
was exonerated vide report dated November 12, 2003. Thereafter petitioner
never agitated her allegations, which she levelled against respondent No. 5
in the year 2002. Now suddenly she has woken up and filed this writ
petition. Above said facts clearly indicate that she has done it at the instance
of the petitioners in CWP No. 17879 of 2007, with whom she has formed a
joint front to fight against respondent No. 5. Furthermore, this writ petition
deserves to be dismissed on account of mis-statement of facts. Para No. 13
of the writ petition reads thus:
“13. That no such or similar petition has been filed in this
Hon’ble Court or in the Apex Court of India by the petitioner
side.”
In view of facts, discussed earlier, the averments made are
false. Earlier also, twice by raising similar grievance, petitioner had come to
this Court. By concealing factum of earlier litigation, an attempt has been
made by the petitioner to over reach this Court. She is guilty of deplorable
conduct. Being a lady, we are hesitant in imposing heavy costs upon her,
which she otherwise deserves. No case is made out for interference.
Dismissed.
(JASBIR SINGH)
JUDGE
(T.S. THAKUR)
CHIEF JUSTICE
May 8, 2009.
DKC