Punjab-Haryana High Court
Mohan Singh vs The State Of Punjab And Others on 7 January, 2010
Author: K.C.Puri
Bench: K.C.Puri
Criminal Misc. No.22784 of 2009 in
Criminal Misc. No.M.14065 of 2008 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
Criminal Misc. No.22784 of 2009 in
Criminal Misc. No.M.14065 of 2008
Date of decision 29.11.2010.
Mohan Singh
...... Petitioner.
versus
The State of Punjab and others
...... Respondents.
CORAM :- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.C.PURI.
Present : Mr. Swaran Sandhir, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. R.S.Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab.
Mr. Ajay Kaushik, Advocate for CBI.
K.C.PURI, J.
This is a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure ( in short - Cr.P.C.) for issuance of direction to conduct investigation of FIR No.22 dated 26.5.2006 under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code ( in short - the IPC) registered at Police Station Nurpur Bedi District Ropar from an independent agency like Central Bureau of Investigation on the ground that statutory authorities have failed to Criminal Misc. No.22784 of 2009 in Criminal Misc. No.M.14065 of 2008 2 perform their duty.
The petitioner is the unfortunate father of Narinder Pal Singh, who came on leave in the month of February 2006 at village Bains and was scheduled to rejoin on 3.4.2006. On 3.4.2006 at about 7.30p.m., Narinder Pal Singh went out from the house by saying that he would come by 5-7 minutes but he did not return and when he tried to contact him on his mobile phone No.9417169230, the phone responded as switched off and non-reachable. The petitioner along with others started to search him but in vain. On 4.4.2006 at about 7.30 a.m., it came to the knowledge of the petitioner and relative that Narinder Pal Singh was lying dead in the forests of Badhi Road and his motor cycle was also standing there. When petitioner along with his brother Sohan Singh reached at the spot, they saw the dead body of Narinder Pal Singh lying there, one plastic bottle, some white powder substances and stool was also lying there nearby the dead body. Mobile phone without sim card and back cover of the deceased was also found near the dead body, which was lying six hundred meter away from the road in the forest and at about 20 kilometer away from the house of the deceased. It would be very difficult for a person to reach at this spot in ordinary routine. It has been further alleged that ASI Ravinder Kumar started investigation and reached the spot. He never tried to collect any evidence available from the place of occurrence where dead body was lying. Even the persons present there requested him to call the sniffer dog squad but he flatly refused by saying that this is a case of suicide. The said ASI picked up the other things of evidence without naked hands, without taking any finger prints from the mobile phone, plastic bottle and even not bother Criminal Misc. No.22784 of 2009 in Criminal Misc. No.M.14065 of 2008 3 to take samples of powder like substance, stool and soil from the spot. The said ASI also failed to got take finger prints from the motorcycle of the deceased. The powder like substance lying near the body of deceased was also not sent to Chemical Examiner for examination. Moreover the viscera of the deceased was also not sent to the chemical-examiner in a proper manner. The sample was taken on 4.4.2006 but it was sealed on 11.4.2006 and was sent on 12.4.2006. When no FIR was registered regarding the murder of the son of the petitioner in spite of several requests made by the petitioner, he approached Senior Superintendent of Police, Ropar on 28.4.2006 and Senior Superintendent of Police, forwarded the application to C.I.A. Staff Ropar but no FIR was registered. On 12.5.2006, Station House Officer, Nurpur Bedi Sheetal Singh came to the house of the petitioner and threatened him by saying that he tried to approach the higher officials and he would see who would solve his problem as presently he is officer of the area and no higher official could solve his case. Petitioner requested him that he wanted justice but of no use. The petitioner made representation dated 26.4.2006 to Director General of Police, Punjab for registration of the FIR and further an application dated 25.5.2006 was moved to D.I.G. Ludhiana and on the intervention of D.I.G. Ludhiana, FIR was registered.
This Court on 11.11.2008 disposed of the petition with following observations :-
"The petition shall stand disposed of accordingly with a direction that the investigation into the matter shall be held by Mr. Parbodh Kumar, I.G., Crime, Punjab who shall conclude Criminal Misc. No.22784 of 2009 in Criminal Misc. No.M.14065 of 2008 4 the exercise within two months from today. Both the parties agree that Police Officer aforementioned is competent and enjoys good reputation in terms of integrity. In the light thereof, it is ordered that even if the officer is transferred to another post, he shall continue to conclude this enquiry. If, however, he is transferred on deputation to the government of India, he shall inform this Court for further orders in accordance with law."
Thereafter, inquiry by Prabodh Kumar, IPS, Inspector General of Police, Crime, Punjab, Chandigarh submitted his report with the following conclusion :-
"In the light of the above discussion, and after taking the entire evidence collected during the investigation into account, the undersigned has reached the following conclusions :-
* The evidence collected in this case does not point at the commission of suicide by the deceased Narinder Pal Singh, rather it is a case of willful murder, and hence, filing of cancellation report is not justified.
* The evidence available against the four suspects mentioned in the subject cited Writ Petition, viz. Inderjit Kaur D/o Davinder Singh R/o Village Bains, Gurvinder Singh S/o Dharam Singh R/o Village Bains. Amrik Singh, uncle of Inderjit Kaur r/o village Maina and Nirmala Devi w/o Davinder Singh (mother of Inderjit Kaur), is not sufficient to arraign them as accused in this case.
* As a long time of about three years has already passed, and also on account of the crucial lapses at the initial stages of investigation/enquiry, it had not been possible during the investigation to reach a definite conclusion about the actual identity of the culprits, and the case may be sent as untraced.
* There was no delay in the collection and dispatch of viscera, on the part of the local police, and the post-mortem was Criminal Misc. No.22784 of 2009 in Criminal Misc. No.M.14065 of 2008 5 conducted in an appropriate manner.
* For their misconduct and negligence and lapses during the initial investigation/enquiry, appropriate departmental proceedings are recommended to be initiated against A.S.I. Ravinder Pal and S.I. Sital Singh, both posted at P.S.Nurpur Bedi, District Rupnagar on 03.04.2006."
Still feeling dis-satisfied with the report, the petitioner approached this Court for investigation of the case.
This Court on 20.5.2009 passed the following order :-
" In this case, the counter was filed. It is apparent from the file that the matter pertaining to the death of a young son had not been properly enquired into. The matter was entrusted for enquiry to Mr.Parbodh Kumar, I.G.Crime, Punjab and he had indicated two police officials for negligence in the conduct of investigation of the case. The findings are reproduced as under
for facility of reference.
"In the light of the above discussion, and after taking the entire evidence collected during the investigation into account, the undersigned has reached the following conclusions :-
* The evidence collected in this case does not point at the commission of suicide by the deceased Narinder Pal Singh, rather it is a case of willful murder, and hence, filing of cancellation report is not justified.
* The evidence available against the four suspects mentioned in the subject cited Writ Petition, viz. Inderjit Kaur D/o Davinder Singh R/o Village Bains, Gurvinder Singh S/o Dharam Singh R/o Village Bains. Amrik Singh, uncle of Inderjit Kaur r/o village Maina and Nirmala Devi w/o Davinder Singh (mother of Inderjit Kaur), is not sufficient to arraign them as accused in this case.
Criminal Misc. No.22784 of 2009 in Criminal Misc. No.M.14065 of 2008 6 * As a long time of about three years has already passed, and also on account of the crucial lapses at the initial stages of investigation/enquiry, it had not been possible during the investigation to reach a definite conclusion about the actual identity of the culprits, and the case may be sent as untraced.
* There was no delay in the collection and dispatch of viscera, on the part of the local police, and the post-mortem was conducted in an appropriate manner.
* For their misconduct and negligence and lapses during the initial investigation/enquiry, appropriate departmental proceedings are recommended to be initiated against A.S.I. Ravinder Pal and S.I. Sital Singh, both posted at P.S.Nurpur Bedi, District Rupnagar on 03.04.2006."
Thereafter, vide order dated 05.05.2009, this Court required the State counsel to indicate the stance of the Government to a proposal to get the matter investigated by the C.B.I. In view of the nature of the allegations made by the petitioner and the findings by Mr.Parbodh Kumar, I.G., Crime, Punjab, it would be appropriate if the stance-related affidavit is filed by the Home Secretary. The affidavit may contain an averment that the contents of the affidavit have been approved by the Chief Secretary. This exercise shall lend a touch of credibility to the State stand in the context of the fact that the allegations pertain to the death of a young son of the petitioner.
List on 26.05.2009."
This Court further on 2.8.2010 passed the following order :-
" Learned State counsel submits that no break through has been achieved in the investigation due to lack of any fresh clue or Criminal Misc. No.22784 of 2009 in Criminal Misc. No.M.14065 of 2008 7 evidence. He has referred to affidavit dated 25.05.2009 of N.S.Kang, Principal Secretary to Government of Punjab, Department of Home Affairs and Justice in this regard. A perusal of the said affidavit it shows that certain police officials who initially conducted the inquiry/investigation, were indicted for their lapses, by the Enquiry Officer. According to him, some departmental action was contemplated against them. He prays for a short adjournment to seek instructions and apprise the court whether any disciplinary action has been initiated against the officials who were indicted for their lapses.
Learned counsel for the petitioner on the other hand, contends that son of the petitioner had died, due to lapse on the part of investigating agency at the very initial stage, the crime remained unravelled. He submits that since life of son of the petitioner has been lost and investigating agency has not been able to conduct a proper investigation, the case needs to be referred to an independent agency. At this stage, learned State counsel submits that he shall seek further instructions from Home Secretary and Director General of Police, Punjab and apprise this court on the next date of hearing.
Adjourned to 30.08.2910."
The State counsel has stated at the bar that he has not received any instructions from Home Secretary and Director General of Police, Punjab till today whether the government is ready to get the matter investigated by the Central Bureau of Investigation or not. Criminal Misc. No.22784 of 2009 in Criminal Misc. No.M.14065 of 2008 8 It is not out of place to mention here that occurrence took place on 3.4.2006. Shri Prabodh Kumar, IPS, Inspector General of Police, Crime, Punjab, Chandigarh has himself observed in his report that due to crucial lapses at the initial stages of investigation/enquiry, it had not been possible during the investigation to reach at a definite conclusion.
Shri Amit Brar, Additional Inspector General of Police has filed affidavit dated 29.9.2010 in this regard and has further mentioned in the affidavit that police official against whom charges were levelled had been exonerated and untraced report is likely to be submitted.
From the report of Shri Prabodh Kumar, IPS, Inspector General of Police, Crime, Punjab, Chandigarh, it is clear that it is a case of murder. The Punjab police could not reach to a logical conclusion in the last more than four years. The submission made by the counsel for the petitioner is that since there is lapse on the part of police officials in the investigation and on that account Punjab Police is not taking appropriate action against the culprits. The State has not taken clear stand whether it is ready for investigation by the Central Bureau of Investigation in spite of so many opportunities given to it during the period of last about one and half years. The Punjab Police in order to avoid its statutory duty to investigate the case to reach at a logical conclusion at initial stage has mention it as a suicide case. However, from the report of Shri Prabodh Kumar, IPS, Inspector General of Police, Crime, Punjab, Chandigarh, it is clear that its a case of murder. The culprit should have been brought on record by the police but in spite of more than four and half years, the police wanted to submit an untraced report.
Criminal Misc. No.22784 of 2009 in Criminal Misc. No.M.14065 of 2008 9 So, considering whole of the circumstances, I am of the considered view that it is a fit case which can be referred to the Central Bureau of Investigation for investigation.
This Court is conscious of the fact that Central Bureau of Investigation is already over burdened and minimum number of cases should be referred to the Central Bureau of Investigation. So that the cases referred to them reached at a logical conclusion. This Court is competent to refer the case under Section 6 of the Special Police Act in view of the parameter laid down by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of State of West Bengal and others V. Committee for Protection of Democratic Rights, West Bengal and others (2010) 3 SCC 571. In para 68 (vi) and
(vii) their Lordships of Hon'ble the Supreme Court has laid down as under :-
"(vi) If a term of Entry 2 of List II of the Seventh Schedule on the one hand and Entry 2-A and Entry 80 of List I on the other, an investigation by another agency is permissible subject to grant of consent by the State concerned, there is no reason as to why, in an exceptional situation, the Court would be precluded from exercising the same power which the Union could exercise in terms of the provisions of the statute; in our opinion, exercise of such power by the constitutional courts would not violate the doctrine of separation of powers. If in such a situation the court fails to grant relief, it would be Criminal Misc. No.22784 of 2009 in Criminal Misc. No.M.14065 of 2008 10 failing in its constitutional duty.
(vii) When the Special Police Act itself provides that subject to the consent by the State, CBI can take up investigation in relation to the crime which was otherwise within the jurisdiction of the State Police, the Court can also exercise its constitutional power of judicial review and direct CBI to take up the investigation within the jurisdiction of the State. The power of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution cannot be taken away, curtailed or diluted by Section 6 of the Special Police Act. Irrespective of their being any statutory provisions acting as a restriction on the powers of the Courts, the restriction imposed by Section 6 of the Special Police Act on the Powers of the Union, cannot be read as restriction on the Powers of the Constitution courts. Therefore, exercise of powers of judicial review by the High Court, in our opinion, would not amount to infringement of either the doctrine of separation of power of the federal structure."
Perusal of the aforesaid observations clearly spelt out that powers of the High Court to get the matter investigate by the Central Bureau of Investigation is not limited by the Special Police Act, which provided for securing of consent from the State concerned.
A similar view has been taken by the Division Bench of this Court in Civil Writ Petition No.14885 of 2010 decided on 5.10.2010.
Shri Ajay Kaushik, Advocate appearing for CBI has submitted that the CBI shall abide by the directions given by this Court. Criminal Misc. No.22784 of 2009 in Criminal Misc. No.M.14065 of 2008 11 The State of Punjab shall transfer all the relevant record to the Central Bureau of Investigation at the earliest.
The records summoned in the present case be returned forthwith to the concerned authorities under signatures of competent authority.
Central Bureau of Investigation is a premium agency of investigation. Needless to say that the authorities of the said agency will take appropriate steps to find out the truth and to reach at a logical conclusion in respect of FIR No.22 dated 26.5.2006 under Section 302 of the IPC registered at Police Station Nurpur Bedi District Ropar. The matter has already been delayed. So, the authorities of Central Bureau of Investigation shall conduct the investigation expeditiously preferably within four months from the receipt of the records from the Punjab Government.
The Director General of Police, Punjab shall ensure the transfer of the records to the Central Bureau of Investigation at the earliest.
The petition stands disposed of accordingly.
( K.C.PURI )
JUDGE
November 29, 2010
sv