Punjab-Haryana High Court
Pammi Alias Preeti vs State Of Haryana on 16 February, 2001
Author: V.M. Jain
Bench: V.M. Jain
ORDER V.M. Jain, J.
1. This is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. filed by the petitioner seeking a direction to the local police to bring on record the inquiry conducted by them, in compliance with the orders passed by this Court in Crl. M. No. 21506-M of 1999 decided on 27,7.1999; seeking quashment of the order dated 19.11.1999 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Faridabad, vide which the application of the petitioner for further investigation in the matter under Section 173(8) Cr.P.C. was rejected; and also praying therein that the investigation of the two FIRs be transferred to CB1.
2. In the petition it was alleged that petitioner got married to Ved Parkash in the year 1995 and out of said wedlock, she gave birth to a daughter, who was now aged 3 years. It was alleged that the husband of the petitioner was running a joint business in partnership with his elder brother namely Shri Jagdish Manchanda. It was alleged that it was all going well till the time when said Shri Jagdish Manchanda started having an evil eye on the property of the husband of the petitioner and started making plan to oust him of the business. It was alleged that as the luck would have it, even the petitioner started having strained relations with her husband, as a result of which the petitioner went to her parents' house. It was alleged that husband of the petitioner slarted making demand of money as he was not on good terms with his brother. It was alleged that on the night of February 6, 1997, the husband of the petitioner visited her parents' house and wanted to take the petitioner forcibly back to her matrimonial home, but the pelitioner did not accompany him, whereupon he left for his house to Faridabad. It was alleged that on the next morning, petitioner received information that her husband had died in his house under suspicious circumstances. It was alleged that thereupon, the petitioner accompanied by her relatives car .e to her matrimonial home, where she came 10 know that the brothers had a fight during night and that in the early morning her husband was found dead. It was alleged that the petitioner stayed at her matrimonial home till 4.3.1997, but her in-laws ill-treated her. It was alleged that the petitioner had a feeling that her in-laws wanted to grab the whole property of her deceased husband and had created such circumstances by which the petitioner apprehended threat to her life and she was forced to go back to her parents house. It was alleged that subsequently, the petitioner came to know that her brother-in-law had forged certain documents in order to misappropriate the assets of the business upon which the petitioner made a complaint dated 14.3.1997 and after much'pursuance FIR No. 573 dated 8.5.1997 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 380, 120B IPC was registered against the elder brother of the husband of the petitioner find his other close relatives. Copies of various documents which proved the forgery etc. were attached with me petition. It was alleged that finding themselves in difficulty, the brother-in-law of the petitioner levelled allegation against the petitioner that her husband had died due to harassment having been given by the petitioner and her relatives and they also levelled allegations of theft etc. against her. It was alleged that petitioner made complaint to the Chief Minister on 27.8.1998 in which she levelled allegations about in- action of the police and about the DIG of the police by the name of Shri P. V. Rathore, helping the accused and putting pressure upon the local police. It was alleged that Chief Minister had directed the Director Vigilance to get the case thoroughly examined. It was alleged that Director Vigilance had made a detailed report and submitted the same to the office of Chief Minister, Haryana, but the said report was not brought to the light, as same reveals the connivance of the local police with the accused and also the role of Shri P. V. Rathore, DIG, who has now been promoted as I.G. Police. Copy of the complaint submitted by the petitioner to the Chief Minister was attached with the petition as also copy of the report of the Forensic Science Laboratory. It was alleged that from the inquiries held by Crime Branch as well as the Vigilance Branch, it was revealed that the documents had been forged. It was alleged that the police was under pressure of the aforesaid DIG, now I.G., and was making all efforts to ensure that the accused get away from the crime. It was alleged that the petitioner was forced to file Crl. M. No. 21506-M of 1999, which was decided on 27.7.1999, whereby the Crime Branch of Haryana was directed to complete the investigation of both the cases bearing FIR No. 573 of 1997 and 207 of 198, the first one having been registered at the instance of the petitioner and the other at the instance of the accused party, within a period of 6 months. Copy of the said order was also annexed with the present petition. It was alleged that after disposal of the said Criminal Misc. Petition, vide order dated 27.7.1999, the petitioner came to know that the police had already filed an untracked report in respect of FIR No. 573 of 1997, which was registered at the instanceof the petitioner in PS Central Faridabad. It was alleged that the petitioner made an application dated 5.1 ]. 1999 to the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Faridabad, requesting the court to direct the investigating agency to further investigate the crime under Section 173(8) Cr.P.C. The said application was rejected by the court concerned vide order dated 19.11.1999. Copies of the application and order were also annexed with the petition. It was alleged that from the various facts referred to above, it was clear that forgery had been committed and entries had been made ante dated. It was alleged that record from the Crime Branch and Vigilance Department may be summoned and the matter should be sent to the CBI in respect of both the FIRs for investigation, as Haryana Police was interested to shield the accused under the influence of one I.G. Police, Haryana. It was accordingly prayed that the order dated 19.11.1999 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Faridabad be set aside and further investigation be ordered under Section 173(8) Cr.PlC. and the investigation in respect of both the FIRs be handed over to CBI.
3. Sub-Inspector Ram Dim, SHO, PS Old Faridabad filed reply on behalf of the official respondents 1 to 5, alleging therein that the petitioner had not come to the court with clean hands and had twisted the facts. It was alleged that the petitioner had previously filed petition bearing Crl. M. No. 21506-M of 1999, which was decided on 27.7.1999, vide which the Crime Branch was directed to investigate the case and to complete the investigation. It was alleged that in pursuance thereof, cases were sent to the Crime Branch for investigation and in compliance thereof, the matter was reinvesligated by the Crime Branch. It was alleged that FIR No. 207 dated 17.5.1998 under Sections 306, 380, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B IPC was registered in PS Old Faridabad, on the complaint of Smt. Leela Wati, mother-in-law of the petitioner, levelling allegations against the present petitioner and her other close relatives. It was alleged that the investigation of the said FIR was carried out and the allegations levelled against the petitioner and her close relatives were found to be truthful and challan arising out of said FIR has been put in the court concerned for judicial verdict. It was further alleged that Fl R No. 573 dated 8.5.1997 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 380, 120B IPC was registered in PS Central Faridabad against Shri Jagdish Manchanda at the instance of the present petitioner. It was alleged that the said FIR was investigated but since no incriminating evidence was found agsint the accused to connect them with the crime, the said FIR was cancel led and the cancellation report was submitted to the court for judicial verdict. It was denied that the police was shielding the accused as alleged. Other allegations were also denied and it was prayed that the present petition be dismissed.
4. During the hearing of the case on 22.11.2000, the learned Counsel appearing for the State had submitted that neither the record nor the inquiry report in respect of inquiry conducted by the Crime Branch was available with him. The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner had submitted that even the Vigilance Branch had conducted some inquiry pertaining to the matter in question and that the said file was available with the State Government. Accordingly, the case was adjourned with a direction that the entire record in respect of inquiries conducted by Crime Branch as also by the Vigilance Branch shall be made available to the court. On the adjourned date, the record of the Crime Branch as also the Vigilance Branch had been produced before the court. Copy of the enquiry report dated 21.12.1998, conducted by the State Vigilance Bureau had been placed on record. As per the said report, the General Power of Attorney was forged and had not been executed by Ved Parkash Manchanda, deceased. It was also reported that the documents were entered in the register of Notary Public on back date and that the papers were also filed in the HUDA office on back date, both with the object of keeping the present petitioner Smt. Pammi (widow of Ved Parkash Manchanda) from getting her and her child's due share in the property left by Ved Parkash Manchanda, deceased. It was also reported that the local police should be asked to investigate the case further, taking into account the FSL report, the file regarding the disciplinary proceedings against the HUDA peon, the original register of the Notary Pubic, the stamp vendor and the admitted signatures of Ved Parkash, deceased. It was further reported that the orders may be passed to hand over these documents to local police for further action and the district police be asked to take suitable action based on the report of FSL. The learned Counsel appearing for the State had submitted before me on that date the State Government had ordered the said report to be "filled" and that no action was taken on the said report of the State Vigilance Bureau. Part arguments were heard on the said date and the case was adjourned for remaining arguments with the direction that the entire record shall be made available to the court on the said date.
5. I have heard the counsel for the parties and have gone through the record carefully.
6. So far as FIR No. 207 dated 17.5.1998 under Sections 306, 380, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B IPC of PS Old Faridabad is concerned, challan has already been filed in the court against various accused persons including the present petitioner Smt. Pammi @ Preeti, widow of Ved Parkash, deceased and her other close relatives. So far as FIR No. 573 dated 8.5.1997 under Sections 420, 467, 380, 120B IPC of PS Central Faridabad iscon-cerned, the local police has already submitted cancellation report to the court and the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Faridabad has already rejected the application of the present petitioner Smt. Pammi @ Preeti (complainant), under Section 173(8) Cr.P.C. for further investigation of the matter, vide order dated 19.11.1999, copy Annexure P-19.
7. In the present case, as referred to above, the petitioner had moved an application to the Chief Minister, Haryana, which was marked to the Director Vigilance for inquiry. The inquiry was conducted by Director Vigilance. Thereafter, the State Vigilance Commissioner vide letter No. 12511 dated 21.12.1998 had written to Chief Secretary to Government of Haryana, Vigilance Department that the inquiry was registered in the State Vigilance Bureau, vide No. 933 dated 27.8.1998 against Jagdish Manchanda on the complaint of Smt. Preeti @ Pammi Manchanda with the allegations that various documents mentioned therein were not genuine and that signatures have been forged on various documents. It was further alleged by the State Vigilance Commissioner that the inquiry into the said allegations was conducted by Shri C.P. Bansal, IPS, Inspector General, State Vigilance Bureau. According to the report of the Inquiry Officer, who had taken into consideration the totality of the evidence, various allegations have been proved. It was mentioned that it was proved that General Power of Attorney in question was forged and was not executed by Shri Ved Parkash Manchanda, deceased. It was also reported that the Inquiry Officer had found that the various documents were entered in the register of Notary Public in back dates with the intention to keep the complainant from getting her and her child's due share in property, to which she would have been entitled. It was also reported that the various papers were filed in the HUDA office in back date with the same objective in mind. The Slate Vigilance Commissioner of the State Vigilance Bureau also informed the Chief Secretary, Government of Haryana that he had gone through the report of the Inquiry Officer and agreed with the same. It was rec-- ommended that the local police may be asked to investigate the case further, taking into consideration the FSL report, the file regarding disciplinary proceedings against HUDA peon, original registers of the Notary Public and Stamp Vendor and the admitted signatures of Ved Parkash, deceased. It was mentioned that all these constitute a part of the investigation of case bearing FIR No. 573 of 1997 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 380 and 120B IPC of PS Central Faridabad, already registered with the Faridabad police and orders may be passed to hand over these to local police for further action. It was further reported that the District Police may be directed to take suitable action, based on the report of the FSL.
8. Since the abovesaid report of the Inspector General of the State Vigilance Bureau and the letter of State Vigilance Commissioner had not been accepted by the Government and was ordered to be filed, as admitted before me by the learned State Counsel, at the time of arguments on 12.1.2001, it appears that the petitioner had filed Crl. M. No. 21506-M of 1999 seeking the investigation of FIR No. 573 dated 8.5.1997 under Section 420 IPC etc. from some independent agency like CBI. Thereupon, vide order dated 27.7.1999, copy Annexure P-17, this court had directed that the investigation of this case alongwith case bearing FIR No. 207 dated 17.5.1998 of PS Old Faridabad be transferred to the Crime Branch of the Haryana Police and to complete investigation within 6 months and to file challan depending upon the result of the investigation. It appears that thereafter, the case was investigated by Crime Branch and subsequently the challan was submitted in the court in case FIR No. 207 dated 17.5.1998 under Sections 306 IPC eic. while cancellation report was filed in court in respect of FIR No. 573 dated 8.5.1997 under Section 420 IPC etc. In the present petition, the petitioner has levelled allegations against an Inspector General of Haryana Police, who was previously posted as DIG I laryana Police. He has not been impleaded as a party in the present petition. It has only been alleged that the Haryana Police is shielding the accused under the pressure of the said police officer, who is a senior police officer of the Haryana Police. In the present case, as referred to above, the Inspector General of Police of State Vigilance Burau had been asked to hold an inquiry. The inquiry was held. The Inspector General of the Haryana Vigilance Bureau had submitted his repotl to the Stale Vigilance Commissioner of the State Vigilance Bureau. The State Vigilance Commissioner had agreed with the report of the Inspector General of Police of State Vigilance Bureau and had recommended action to be taken by the local police on the basis of Ihe said report of the Vigilance Department. However, for the reasons best known to the State Government, the said report of the Stale Vigilance Bureau was ordered to be "filed" and no action was taken on the said report of the State Vigilance Bureau. This itself shows ihat there is something wrong somewhere. The Inspector General of Stale Vigilance Bureau had prima facie found truth in the allegations levelled by the present petitioner in FIR No. 573 dated 8.5.1997, under Sections 420 IPC etc. and had recommended that the matter be further investigated by the local police, keeping in view the various documents and various circumstances referred in the said report of the State Vigilance Bureau. However, the State Government filed the said report of the State Vigilance Bureau. Since the local police had not taken any action against the accused in the aforesaid FIR, on the petition filed by the petitioner, the matter was referred to the Crime Branch by this Court. Even the Crime Branch found that no case was made out against the accused in the aforesaid FIR lodged by the present petitioner. Accordingly, the local police filed cancellation report of the said FIR. The application filed by the present petitioner under Section 173(8) Cr.P.C. for further investigation of the case was also rejected by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Faridabad vide order dated 19.11.1999, as the report submitted by the State Vigilance Bureau against the accused had not been produced before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate.
9. Taking into consideration the conflict in the result of the inquiry/investigation conducted by the State Vigilance Bureau, Ihe Crime Branch of the Haryana Police and the local police and taking into consideration the serious allegations made by the petitioner and taking into consideration the material which has been brought on record by the Inspector General of State Vigilance Bureau in his report, which was accepted by the State Vigilance Commissioner of the Slate Vigilance Bureau, referred to above, in my opinion, it is a fit case where order dated 19.11.1999 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Faridabad dismissing the application of the petitioner under Section 173(8) Cr.P.C. for further investigation of the case, may be sel aside and necessary directions may be issued directing the transfer of investigation in the case arising out of FIR No. 573 dated 8.5.1997 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 380, 120B IPC of PS Central Faridabad to the CBI, so that the truth may come out and justice may be done to all concerned. Ordered accordingly. It is further directed that the investigation shall be conducted by an experienced Inspector of the CBI under the direct supervision of the S.P. CBI, Chandigarh. It is further directed that the final report shall be submitted by the CBI, depending upon the result of the said investigation. It is further directed that Ihe investigation shall be completed within a period of 6 months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order by the S.P. CBI., Chandigarh.