Satram Singh vs State of Punjab

R.L. Ananad, J.

Satnam Singh son of Tulsi Ram, has filed the present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying for the registration of a Criminal case against the persons mentioned in para No. 2 of the petition and also in Annexure P4. The allegations of the petitioner are that on 3.10.1996, Rajinder Singh, Jagdish Lal and Sheela, all residents of Dalichi Mohalla, Ward No. 5, Sirhind along with some other Gundas demolished his house and took all the household articles including the electric meter installed in the said building. The matter was allegedly reported to the police of Police Station Fatehgarh Sahib. The SHO instead of registering a case, proceeded under Section 107/151 Cr.P.C. so much so, the petitioner was also arrested. Thereafter the matter was allegedly reported to DIG, Patiala Range, Patiala giving the details of the crime committed, but inspite of representation and complaint Annexure P4 no action was taken against the offenders as the Police was helping them. Seeing no other alternative, the present petition.

Notice of the petition was given to the respondents who filed reply and denied the allegations. According to the respondents, the petitioner encroached on the municipal land owned by Municipal Committee, Sarhind and he has a dispute with the employees of the Municipal Committee and for that reason the petitioner falsely named those persons as accused in para No. 2 of the petition. It has been categorically stated in the reply that no criminal case has been registered against the alleged offenders. However, there was some quarrel between the petitioner and his cousin Jagdish Lal and for that reason petitioner and Jagdish Lal were put in 107/151 Cr.P.C.

I have heard Mr. Ranjan Lakhanpal, Advocate, on behalf of the petitioner and Shri G.S. Gill, AAG, Punjab on behalf of the respondents.

My attention has been invited to the photographs Annexures P1 to P3 which prima facie tell the story that the house was ransacked. Even the reply filed by the respondents indicates one thing that there was some dispute between the petitioner and one Jagdish Lal and police went into action to a limited extent by invoking the provisions under section 107/151 Cr.P.C. There is no indication in the written reply that under what circumstances the house of the petitioner was allegedly demolished.

We are in a country which is governed by rule of law. Once a cognizable offence is made out as per the dictum of the Hon''ble Supreme Court, it is the statutory duty of the police of register a case under Section 154(3) Cr.P.C. and should not feel shy in registering the case lest the crime graph of a particular police station may go up. A citizen living in a free country like ours expects too much from the police which is supposed to be the custodian of the rights of the citizens. By adapting a negative attitude and by minimising its number of F.I.Rs. the Police Department is not doing any favour to the citizens not it enhances the respect of the State in the eyes of general public. This Court is of the opinion that the allegations of the petitioner requires investigation. Therefore, the petition is hereby allowed and directions are given to the SHO, Police Station Sarhind to register a criminal case on the document Annexure P4, copy which has been supplied to the learned AAG, Punjab in Court and to investigate according to law. The investigation of the investigating officer should be verified by an officer not below the rank of DSP and thereafter the police report should be presented in the Court of Ilaqa Magistrate. This petition stands allowed as stated above. JUDGMENT dasti on payment.