Punjab-Haryana High Court
Randeep Kumar vs State Of Punjab on 4 October, 2011
Author: Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia
Bench: Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia
Criminal Misc. No. M-6125 of 2011 1
In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, at Chandigarh
Criminal Misc. No. M-6125 of 2011
Date of Decision: 4.10.2011
Randeep Kumar
... Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab
... Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA.
Present: By Post.
Mr. Sudhir Nehra, Additional Advocate General,
Punjab, for the respondent.
Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J. (Oral)
One Randeep Kumar alias Vijay Kumar Topi is lodged as an under-trial prisoner in Central Jail, Amritsar. He has made a grievance that after his arrest many false cases have been foisted upon him. It is averred in the application received by the Registry, which has been treated as a Criminal Misc. Application, that eight cases have been registered at Amritsar, one at Pathankot, one at Sultanpur Lodhi, one at Ropar and one at Chandigarh. A further apprehension has been raised in the petition that during the period of his transit remand, he can be the victim of false encounter.
Gurnam Singh, Assistant Commissioner of Police (North), Amritsar City, has filed a reply by way of his affidavit, on behalf of the Criminal Misc. No. M-6125 of 2011 2 State, wherein he has stated that the petitioner is popularly known as "Topi Auto Lifter" and he has committed theft of vehicles at various places. It is further stated that numerous cases have been registered against him. List of cases, registered against the petitioner, has been attached with the reply as Annexure R1.
A perusal of the list (Annexure R1) shows that the cases are not only registered against the petitioner in the State of Punjab but also in the State of Jammu & Kashmir. Therefore, this Court shall refrain to entertain the prayer made for not registering case/cases against the petitioner or as to how the Investigating Officer should conduct investigation. This Court is of the view that law should take its own course. However, this Court is of the view that the life of petitioner ought to be protected. Hence, it is directed that any time, when the petitioner is to be taken on transit remand, before he is to be lodged in the Jail, he be produced before the concerned Area Judicial Magistrate. Furthermore, adequate security be provided to the petitioner so that no harm is caused to his life.
With the observations made above, the present petition is disposed of.
(Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia) Judge October 4, 2011 "DK"