Manjit Singh vs Senior Superintendent of Police

R.L. Anand, J.

Manjit Singh petitioner has brought the present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking directions by this Court for registering the case against the person enlisted in the headnote of the petition for the various offences enumerated therein. The allegations of the petitioner are contained in paras No. 2 and 3 of the petition, reading of which prima facie discloses of a cognizable offence.

Notice of the petition was given to the respondents who have filed reply today in the Court.

The learned counsel for the petitioner has invited my attention to the enquiry report Annexure P.4 conducted by Superintendent of Police District Headquarter who categorically stated: "Till now my secret and open enquiry has revealed that the allegations which have been levelled against Constable Baljinder Singh, Dilbag Singh son of Pal Singh, resident of Bura Gujjar Road, Muktsar, S. Gurcharan Singh son of Leekal Singh resident of Chanal Road, Faridkot, Gurjant Singh son of Sher Singh resident of Kothe Then wala, Sadiq Road, Faridkot and Gurshavinder Singh son of Nirmal Singh, resident of village Ghaniewala are fully proved."

It was opined by the Superintendent of Police Headquarter "I recommend for his transfer to a far away place, and departmental enquiry and recommend for security measures against the companions from whom Manjit Singh has got still risk and their licences may be cancelled and legal action may be taken."

The pointer in this subsequent para is towards Baljinder Singh and aforesaid persons. This report was also put up before Harbans Singh, District Attorney, Faridkot under the orders of the SSP for his opinion. The District Attorney vide his report dated 9.10.1996 gave an opinion that prima facie a case under Sections 365, 323, 342, 347, 465, 467 and 468 read with sections 511/120B IPC was made out. Strange enough that in spite of the fact that the enquiry was conducted at the level of Superintendent of Police, the Police did not go into action for the registration of the case, against the dictum of the Hon''ble Supreme Court reported as AIR 1992 Supreme Court 604, State of Haryana v. Ch, Bhajan Lal and others).

The learned defence counsel submitted that another enquiry was conducted also at the level of S.P., in which the allegations of the complainant were found to be false. It has also been submitted by the learned defence counsel that the department has moved to the District Magistrate under the Police rules for necessary action against Baljinder Singh. The defence taken up by the State strengthens the opinion of this Court that it is a fit case where a criminal case should be registered against the five persons mentioned in the headnote of the petition in order to elucidate the truth. Since it is stated that there are contradictory findings with regard to the allegations of the complainant, therefore, for this reason, directions are further given that after the registration of the case, the investigation be handed over to S.P. (Crimes). The officers, who earlier conducted the enquiry need not to participate in the investigation.

Resultantly, the present petition is hereby allowed with the above observations.