Brij Lal vs State of Punjab and Others

Gurdev Singh, J.—Heard.

Petitioner, Brij Lal, has filed this petition u/s 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for issuance of directions to respondents No. 1 to 3 to protect his life and liberty, which is in imminent danger at the hands of respondents No. 4 and that the said respondent be restrained from harassing him illegally.

He has contended therein that in the year 1984, he was illegally picked up from his house by one Gurdev Singh, Inspector, SHO Police Station Division No. 2 Ludhiana, Harpal Singh, Sub Inspector and some police officials of that police station without any reason. His wife, Raj Rani, filed criminal writ petition for habeas corpus (Crl. W.P. No. 403 of 1987) before this Court in which, Warrant Officer was appointed to conduct the raid and recovered him from the illegal custody of the police of the police station. The Warrant Officer submitted his report to that effect to this Court and it was pleased to direct Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ludhiana, to initiate an enquiry against the above said police officials. After some time, he was again illegally picked up from his house by the said Inspector Gurdev Singh and MHC of that police station without any rhyme and reason. Again criminal writ for habeas corpus (Crl. W.P. No. 713 of 1987) was filed before this Court and a Warrant Officer was appointed. That time also he was recovered from the illegal detention of the police official of that police station. The Warrant Officer submitted his report and enquiry was ordered to be conducted by this Court by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ludhiana. Previously, the police officials had not been appearing during those enquiries but on the persistent pursuing of the case by the petitioner, they started appearing therein. Those police officials had good rapport with the local police of Ludhiana and the local police is pressurizing him to compromise the matter and get the enquiry withdrawn/dropped. He refused to enter into any such compromise. On his refusal, his son, Sohan Lal @ Sanjay was illegally picked up by the police on 16.8.2008 at 9-00 a.m. He tried his level best to trace out his son but failed. Then a telegram to the Hon''ble Chief Justice of this Court was given by Balwinder Singh, cousin of his son, on the same date at 3.52 p.m. Later on, his son was involved in a false case, FIR No. 9 dated 16.1.2008 registered u/s 22 of the ND& PS Act, 1985 in police station Kotwali, Ludhiana, on the allegation that he was found in possession of 10 gms of smack. It was shown in the record of the police that his son was arrested at 4.20 p.m. and that itself shows that he was illegally picked up earlier so as to pressurize and harass him for entering into the compromise. The police did not stop harassing him and started raiding his house time and again at odd hours. Apprehending danger/untoward incident, he sent a telegram to Hon''ble Chief Justice of this Court on 14.6.2008. On 19.10.2008, at about 11.30 a.m., Jagjit Singh ASI, along with some other police officials came to his factory and asked him to withdraw the enquiry pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ludhiana, and on his refusal, threatened him that he and his family members would be involved in criminal cases. He again sent a telegram regarding the incident to the Hon''ble Chief Justice of this Court. Respondent No. 4 and the local police of Ludhiana, has been pressurizing and harassing him that he should withdraw the enquiries otherwise he and his other family members will be involved in criminal cases. In order to pressurize him and in order to make him to succumb to the above said demand, he was involved in false case on the allegation of possessing of 4 gms of smack in respect of which FIR No. 15 dated 19.2.2009 was registered u/s 22 of the ND&PS Act in police station Division No. 4, Ludhiana. On 10.4.2009, respondent No. 4 along with Harjinder Singh, ASI, illegally picked up his daughter Kiran Bala and her niece, Aarti and he was asked to give his affidavit for withdrawing the enquiries and that in lieu thereof his daughter, Kiran Bala, and her niece Aarti would be released. When he did not give such affidavit, Kiran Bala was involved in a false case regarding the possession of 34 gms of smack by way of FIR dated 11.4.2009 registered under Sections 22 of the ND & PS Act in police Station, Division No. 2, Ludhiana. Aarti was released by respondent No. 4 after receiving the bribe of Rs. 10,000/- from him. Respondent No. 4 is threatening him and is making efforts to ensure that he does not reach the Court to make his statement in the enquiries, which are now fixed before the Chief Judicial Magistrate for 22.5.2009. He is having a reasonable apprehension that he and his family members will be involved in false cases and he will be arrested before the said date.

On notice of motion having been issued, respondents No. 1 to 3 filed their reply which is in the form of an affidavit of Kamaljeet Singh Dhillon, Deputy Superintendent of Police (Detective), Ludhiana. It has been stated therein that the petitioner has levelled false and frivolous allegation against respondent No. 4 and other police officials to pressurize them not to pursue the cases, which have been registered against him, his son-in-law and two daughters. The petitioner himself is involved in 14 cases under the ND & PS Act, Gambling Act, Excise Act and Indian Penal Code. His son�in-law is involved in five such cases and he has already been convicted in one of those cases. His daughter is also involved in cases under the ND & PS Act. On the complaint/application of the petitioner, an enquiry was conducted into the matter and after that enquiry, it was proved that he was levelling false allegations against the police officials and respondent No. 4 and there is no substance in those allegations. The present petition has been filed by him with oblique motive and for ulterior consideration. He is habitual offender and whole of his family is involved in a number of criminal cases of different nature. He has approached this Court by putting forward distorted and twisted version. There is no threat or danger to him and his family members and he was never harassed. In fact, by filing this petition he wants to create defence in his favour and pressurizing the local police not to take any action against him and his family members.

In view of the fact that in the reply, it was stated that the petitioner himself and his family members are involved in a number of criminal cases, respondents No. 1 to 3 were directed to submit the brief of those cases. As per the affidavit of Varinderpal Singh Brar, Superintendent of Police (Detective) Ludhiana, following criminal cases were registered against the petitioner himself:

FIR No. 80 dated 21.6.1992 registered u/s 20 of the ND & PS Act in Police Station Division No. 2, Ludhiana.

FIR No. 81 dated 21.6.1992 registered u/s 18 of the ND & PS Act in Police Station Division No. 2, Ludhiana.

FIR No. 12 dated 29.1.1993 registered u/s 20 of the ND & PS Act in Police Station Sarabha Nagar, Ludhiana.

FIR No. 13 dated 29.1.1993 registered u/s 25 of the Arms Act in Police Station Sarabha Nagar, Ludhiana.

FIR No. 76 dated 27.6.1993 registered u/s 13-A of the Gambling Act in Police Station Division No. 3, Ludhiana.

FIR No. 39 dated 1.3.1994 registered u/s 13-A of the Gambling Act in Police Station Division No. 2, Ludhiana.

FIR No. 73 dated 8.5.1994 registered u/s 13-A of the Gambling Act in Police Station Division No. 2, Ludhiana.

FIR No. 160 dated 1.10.1994 registered under 323, 506, 148 and 149 IPC in Police Station Division No. 2, Ludhiana.

FIR No. 15 dated 19.2. 2009 registered u/s 22 of the ND & PS Act in Police Station Division No. 4, Ludhiana

The following cases were registered against Rajinder Kumar @ Billi, son-in-law of the petitioner:

FIR No. 103 dated 21.8.2004 registered u/s 20 of the ND & PS Act in Police Station Division No. 2. Ludhiana.

FIR No. 104 dated 18.10.2005 registered u/s 20 of the ND & PS Act in Police Station Division No. 5, Ludhiana

FIR No. 23 dated 6.4.2006 registered u/s 20 of the ND & PS Act in Police Station Division No. 2, Ludhiana

The following case was registered against Suman Bala, daughter of the petitioner, wife of Rajinder Kumar @ Billi:

FIR No. 96 dated 17.8.2005 registered u/s 20 of the ND & PS Act in Police Station Division No. 2, Ludhiana

The following case was registered against Kiran, other daughter of the petitioner:

FIR No. 54 dated 11.4.2009 registered u/s 21 of the ND & PS Act in Police Station Division No. 2, Ludhiana

I have heard learned Counsel for both the sides.

It has been submitted by learned Counsel for the petitioner that false cases were registered against the petitioner and in fact most of those cases were registered in order to pressurize him for withdrawing himself from the enquiries, which have been ordered by this Court, to be conducted through Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ludhiana. The life and liberty of the petitioner and his family members are in danger and protection be immediately provided to them.

On the other hand, it has been submitted by learned State counsel that there is no such threat perception to the petitioner and his family members and the police is proceeding strictly in accordance with law. Truthful cases have been registered against the petitioner and his family members, who are indulging in narcotic etc. In order to make out the defence in those cases and to go on indulging in such like activities, under the garb of the protection order, the present petition has been filed.

A perusal of the list of the cases, so submitted by respondents No. 1 to 3, clearly shows that some cases were registered from the year 1992 to 1994. The position would have been different if all those cases have been registered immediately after the enquiries were ordered to be conducted by this Court or after the filing of the present petition. It is not only the petitioner against whom such criminal cases have been registered, but those have been registered against his daughter and son-in-law also. For all these years, he never came out with such a petition before this Court for the protection of his life and liberty and other members of his family members. It is not his case that he was attacked or caused any damage by the police or any one else during the intervening period. No doubt, every citizen has a fundamental right for the protection of his life and liberty but it is to be seen by the Court, after going through the facts and circumstances of the case, if such a protection order is to be passed.

Keeping in view the criminal back ground of the petitioner and his family members, it cannot be said that such a protection order is to be passed. It appears that petitioner wants to get that order in order to create the defence in the criminal cases, which have already been registered against him. Moreover, such an order may be misused by him for committing wrongful acts.

There is no merit in this petition and the same is hereby dismissed.