Kashmir Singh vs State of Punjab

K.K. Srivastava, J.

By means of this petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., Kashmir Singh, son of Mehan Singh, resident of village Kamawala urf Muthianwala, Police Station Mallanwala, district Ferozepur, seeks issuance of direction to respondent No. 2 to register a case against respondents No. 4 to 10 for the offences punishable under Sections 364/302/148/149 IPC.

Didar Singh, son of the petitioner, is alleged to have gone to his fields on 4.8.1997 at about 500 p.m. but thereafter he never returned. A search was made for him, but no trace of him was available. The petitioner lodged a complaint with respondent No. 2, wherein he expressed his suspicion regarding the complicity of respodents. No. 4 to 10 for abduction of his son. The report was, however, not registered. A representation was made to the Deputy Superintendent of Police on 11.8.1997, which was followed by another representation to the Senior Superintendent of Police on 11.8.1997, which was followed by another represenation to the Senior Superintent of Police and then to the Deputy Inspector General of Police on 23.8.1997. Even the State Government was approached in this regard, but nothing happened. Consequently this petition was filed.

Upon issuance of notice of motion, a reply was filed on behalf of respondents No. 1 to 3, wherein it was alleged in para 3 as under :

"That the contents of this para are admitted to the extent that an application dated 8.8.1997, 11.8.97 and 23.8.97 were received in the O/o SSP/Ferozepur, which were marked to Dy. Supdt. of Police (Detective) Ferozepur for enquiry and report. After completion of enquiry, it was reported vide dated 15.9.1997 that Didar Sigh S/o the petitioner was a habitual addict and used to consume available intoxicants. He might have been drowned in the river while crossing it or returning from his house (copy of the report for DSP (Det.) and its English translation is Annexure R2 & R2/T). Another aplication of the petitioner dated 891997 was received in the office of DIG FR, Ferozepur, which was marked to Supdt of Police (Detective) of enquiry and report and a similar report as given by DSP(D) was fowarded by Supdt. of Police (Detective) dated 26.12.1997 regarding the disappearance of Didar Singh S/o the petitioner. It was also pointed out in the report that the petitioner has close relations with Bhira Singh son of Kashmir Singh R/o Ratooke, who was accused for the murder of nephew of Malagar Singh respondent No. 7 S/o Amar Singh R/o Kamalwala urf Muthianwala, in order to put pressure on respondents No. 4 to 10. It seems that the petitioner has falsely accused them, so that a compromise may be effected.

It is also not out of place to mention here that Kashmir Singh petitioner has sworn in his affidavit date 6.12.1997 that Malagar Singh S/o respondent No. 4, Jagtar Singh S/o Malagar Singh and Pargat Singh S/o Darshan Singh, R/o Kamalwala, urf Muthianwala had not abducted his son. He had only suspicion which have been removed now and he does not want to proceed against them. From these circumstances, it is clear that the petitioner is falsely accusing respondents for the abduction of his son (photocopy of the report of S.P.(D), affidavit of the petitioner and copy of FIR and its English translation are Annexures R3, R4, R5 and R3/T, R4/T and R5/T.)"

It is a matter of deep concern that the son of the petitioner is reported missing and as per suspicion expressed by the petitioner, the culprits are alleged to have abducted him and since then he is untraced. The State has taken this matter so casually that during enquiry which was conducted after registration of Daily Diary Report, resulted in the supposition that the missing person in a drunken state might have fallen down the bridge and died. In my considered view, the State cannot take shelter under such enquiry and refuse to register the First Information Report in the present case wherein the son of the petitioner was reported missing and, in fact, suspected to be abducted and done away with.

Resultantly, this petition has considerable merit and is allowed. A direction is issued to respondent No. 2 to register FIR on the basis of complaints of the petitioner (copies of which have been placed on record as Annexure P1 to P3) within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of copy of this order and thereafter to proceed with the investigation of the case according to law and conclude the same expeditiously.