Ram Avtar Singh vs State of Punjab

V.S. Aggarwal, J.

Petitioners Ram Avtar Singh and another have filed the present petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to direct respondents 1 to 3 for registration of a first information report against respondents 5 to 42 with respect to offences punishable under sections 302/307/120B/148/149 IPC read with Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act.

Petitioners assert that they are the President and Secretary of the Cotton Mill Labour Federation. The labour belonging to the said Federation had been working in Bhiwani Cotton Mill & Industries Pvt. Ltd., Abohar. The labourers had raised some demands. They had started a hunger strike in front of the Mill from 21.10.1991. Two Labourers in this connection had sat on hunger strike. On 25.10.1991 the petitioners were called inside the Mill. They were threatened that they should compel the fellow worker to leave the hunger strike, otherwise they would be killed. As usual they had addressed the workers but the Police had started firing. As a result of which 8 persons died and further 18 persons were seriously injured. Despite their best efforts, no first information report was registered. Hence, the present petition.

In the reply filed by respondents 1 to 3, objection has been taken that the petitioners are settling their personal cores against the respondent. They had already resigned and were not the workers of Bhiwani Cotton Mills, Abohar. Regarding incident of 25.10.1991, the matter had been settled between the workmen and the management. The deceased and the injured have been duly compensated. It was further pointed out that the Police resorted to the fire in the air to deter the workers. The matter had been investigated. The firing was resorted as per order of the Magistrate. Respondents 9 and 11 in their separate reply, also basically took the same plea.

During the course of arguments, it was pointed that petitioners are in no way connected with the alleged act or omission and, therefore, this petition should be dismissed because the petitioners have no right or interest in the said act or omission.

There is no controversy that judicial process cannot be allowed to be used for the satisfaction of an individual whim or pious though they may apparently look. The petitioners were no more employees of the said Mill at Abohar. They are not the relations of the deceased or the injured. In a given case if it was shown that it was to settle the old score, the Court will not permit such like petitions to be entertained. However, when certain facts have come to light and to the notice of the Court about a ghastly event, the Court would be failing in its duty not to permit the law to take its own course. Keeping in view the facts to be mentioned hereinafter, the said contention of the respondents is repelled.

In that event it had been urged that there has been a delay of more than 5 years since the said event took place. At this state, it will not be appropriate to restart something that has become stale. However, the said plea deserves to be mentioned, to be rejected. Eight persons are alleged to have died and more than a dozen injured. The complaint had been made at the earliest but for all these orders, action was taken ever so slowly. The doors of different authorities were being knocked. It is thereafter that the petitioners had approached this Court. The present case cannot be equated with one where inordinate delay is there preceded by total inaction. Therefore, in the peculiar facts, the said plea of delay in approaching the Court is of little consequence.

Another limb of the arguments advanced was that compensation had been paid to the injured and relatives of the deceased. However, this may absolve a person from civil liability but so far as the criminal law is concerned if it is so established, the said compensation when paid to discharge the civil liability, is not the remedy. The matter must be investigated and taken care of.

It is settled law and we know from the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of State of Haryana and others v. Sh. Bhajan Lal and others, 1991(1) RCR (Crl.) 383 : AIR 1992 SC 604 that when information discloses a cognizable offence, on basis of it, first information report should be recorded. In paragraph 32 the Supreme Court held :

"It is, therefore, manifestly clear that if any information disclosing a cognizable offence is laid before an officer in charge of a police station satisfying the requirements of Section 154(1) of the Code, the said Police Officer has no other option except to enter the substance thereof in the prescribed form, that is to say, to register a case on the basis of such information."

In the present case also the information discloses a cognizable offence and consequently, there is no legal hurdle in recording of the first information report. In fact the authorities are under a legal obligation to do so.

Eloquently the private respondent''s learned counsel has urged that on basis of the complaints that had been made, it cannot be determined as to against whom the alleged incident is being attributed.

The argument which at the first blush appears to be good, on close scrutiny deserves to be rejected. On basis of the information, the first information report has to be recorded. It is thereafter that the investigation has to take place. The authorities would ensure a proper investigation and determine as to who were the guilty persons, if any. Reference was made to the report of the Additional District Magistrate, Ferozepur who had held an enquiry. For the present this Court is not expressing any opinion on the merits but it is directed that investigation shall be conducted independently. In the peculiar facts, it should be conducted not below the rank of Deputy Inspector General of the Police.

For these reasons the petition is allowed and it is directed that on basis of the compliant that had been made, copy of which is Annexure P.2 a first information report be recorded and thereafter investigation be conducted by a person not below the rank of Deputy Inspector General of Police of the rank (area).