Crm No.M-19877 of 2014 Vs. State of Punjab and Others - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1143115
CourtPunjab and Haryana High Court
Decided OnJun-04-2014
AppellantCrm No.M-19877 of 2014
RespondentState of Punjab and Others
Excerpt:
in the high court of punjab and haryana at chandigarh crm no.m-19877 of 2014 date of decision: 04.06.2014 malkit kaur @ jagjeet kaur ....petitioner versus state of punjab and others ....respondents present: mr.saurabh kaushik, advocate for the petitioner. s.s.saron, j. the criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed under section 482 of the code of criminal procedure for directing the official respondents no.1 to 3 to protect the life, liberty and property of the petitioner as well as her minor children from the hands of private respondents no.4 and 5. the petitioner was married to jaswinder singh - the son of respondent no.4 achhar singh on 14.10.1995. jaswinder singh husband of the petitioner unfortunately died on 26.05.2011. harjinder singh respondent no.5 is the brother in law of the petitioner. the petitioner has inter alia alleged that her father in law and brother in law (respondents no.4 and 5) since the date of her marriage had been harassing her on petty matters.the petitioner had, therefore, started residing at s.a.s.nagar with her husband. after the death of her husband the respondents no.4 and 5, it is alleged, became dishonest and started misbehaving and harassing her. the amit kaundal 2014.06.05 10:33 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh crm no.m-19877 of 2014 -2- reason for this it is stated is that the petitioner is residing in a big house no.306, phase i, mohali. due to the dishonest intention of respondents no.4 and 5, it is alleged that they want to sell the said house. the petitioner had been requesting them not to sell the house and not to oust the petitioner from the said house. it is alleged that on 19.05.2014, respondents no.4 and 5 came to her house along with some 'gunda' persons during the night. they started misbehaving with the petitioner and respondents no.4 and 5 asked the other persons with them to throw the petitioner and her children out of the house. on the next morning i.e.20.05.2014, the petitioner approached the senior superintendent of police, sas nagar, mohali (respondent no.2) by making a representation (annexure p-1).however, no action has been taken on the part of the senior superintendent of police, sas nagar, mohali (respondent no.2).therefore, it is prayed that the official respondents be directed to take appropriate action on her representation. it may be noticed that for the relief as claimed, the petitioner has a remedy of filing an application under section 156 (3) of the code of criminal procedure for registration of a case. in sakiri vasu v. state of u.p.and others.2008 (1) rcr (criminal) 392, it was inter alia held by the hon'ble supreme court that in a case where the magistrate finds that the police amit kaundal 2014.06.05 10:33 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh crm no.m-19877 of 2014 -3- has not registered a case, the magistrate can order the police to register fir; besides, if the police has not done its duty of investigating the case at all, the magistrate can issue a direction to the police to do the investigation properly, and can even monitor the same. in the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner may in the firs.instance avail her remedy before the concerned magistrate in terms of section 156 (3) of the code of criminal procedure. the criminal miscellaneous petition is disposed of accordingly. (s.s.saron) judge0406.2014 a.kaundal amit kaundal 2014.06.05 10:33 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh
Judgment:

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM No.M-19877 of 2014 Date of decision: 04.06.2014 Malkit Kaur @ Jagjeet Kaur ....Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others ....Respondents Present: Mr.Saurabh Kaushik, Advocate for the petitioner.

S.S.SARON, J.

The criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for directing the official respondents No.1 to 3 to protect the life, liberty and property of the petitioner as well as her minor children from the hands of private respondents No.4 and 5.

The petitioner was married to Jaswinder Singh - the son of respondent No.4 Achhar Singh on 14.10.1995.

Jaswinder Singh husband of the petitioner unfortunately died on 26.05.2011.

Harjinder Singh respondent No.5 is the brother in law of the petitioner.

The petitioner has inter alia alleged that her father in law and brother in law (respondents No.4 and 5) since the date of her marriage had been harassing her on petty matteRs.The petitioner had, therefore, started residing at S.A.S.Nagar with her husband.

After the death of her husband the respondents No.4 and 5, it is alleged, became dishonest and started misbehaving and harassing her.

The Amit Kaundal 2014.06.05 10:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM No.M-19877 of 2014 -2- reason for this it is stated is that the petitioner is residing in a big house No.306, Phase I, Mohali.

Due to the dishonest intention of respondents No.4 and 5, it is alleged that they want to sell the said house.

The petitioner had been requesting them not to sell the house and not to oust the petitioner from the said house.

It is alleged that on 19.05.2014, respondents No.4 and 5 came to her house along with some 'gunda' persons during the night.

They started misbehaving with the petitioner and respondents No.4 and 5 asked the other persons with them to throw the petitioner and her children out of the house.

On the next morning i.e.20.05.2014, the petitioner approached the Senior Superintendent of Police, SAS Nagar, Mohali (respondent No.2) by making a representation (Annexure P-1).However, no action has been taken on the part of the Senior Superintendent of Police, SAS Nagar, Mohali (respondent No.2).Therefore, it is prayed that the official respondents be directed to take appropriate action on her representation.

It may be noticed that for the relief as claimed, the petitioner has a remedy of filing an application under Section 156 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure for registration of a case.

In Sakiri Vasu v.

State of U.P.and otheRs.2008 (1) RCR (Criminal) 392, it was inter alia held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that in a case where the Magistrate finds that the police Amit Kaundal 2014.06.05 10:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM No.M-19877 of 2014 -3- has not registered a case, the Magistrate can order the police to register FIR; besides, if the police has not done its duty of investigating the case at all, the Magistrate can issue a direction to the police to do the investigation properly, and can even monitor the same.

In the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner may in the fiRs.instance avail her remedy before the concerned Magistrate in terms of Section 156 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

The criminal miscellaneous petition is disposed of accordingly.

(S.S.SARON) JUDGE0406.2014 A.Kaundal Amit Kaundal 2014.06.05 10:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh