Himachal Pradesh High Court
Jagdev Singh vs State Of Himachal Pradesh And Others on 23 December, 2022
Author: Ajay Mohan Goel
Bench: Ajay Mohan Goel
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
CWP No. 3305 of 2021
Decided on: 23.12.2022
.
Jagdev Singh ....Petitioner.
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh and others ...Respondents.
Coram
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?1
For the petitioner:
r Mr. Dinesh Bhanot, Advocate.
For the respondents: M/s Dinesh Thakur, Additional Advocate
Generals, with Mr. Amit Kumar Dhumal,
Deputy Advocate General, for respondents
No. 1 to 3.
None for respondent No. 4.
Ms. Kamlesh Kumari, Advocate, vice Mr.
Amrinder Rana, Advocate, for respondent
No. 5.
Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral):
CMP No. 7407 of 2021
By way of this application, a prayer has been made for impleading Sh. Bhag Singh and Sh. Manjeet Singh as respondents No. 4 and 5 in the present petition.
2. Both the proposed respondents stand served. As despite service, none has put in appearance on behalf of proposed respondent Bhag Singh, therefore, he has already been proceeded 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
::: Downloaded on - 29/12/2022 20:32:00 :::CIS 2against ex parte, whereas, Ms. Kamlesh Kumari, vice Mr. Amrinder Rana, Advocate, has put in appearance on behalf of proposed respondent No. 5.
.
3. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusing the averments made in the application, the same is allowed and Sh. Bhag Singh and Sh. Manjeet Singh are ordered to be impleaded as respondents No. 4 and 5 in the petition. Amended memo of parties is taken on record. The application stands disposed of. r CWP No. 3305 of 2021
4. By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has, inter alia, prayed for the following reliefs:-
"(i) Issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondent authorities to register the FIR in the instant case.
(ii) Issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondent authorities to investigate the matter in a free and fair manner."
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner, after making his submissions on merit, has drawn the attention of the Court to communication, dated 03.06.2021, appended with the writ petition as Annexure P-2 and submitted that despite petitioner having raised his grievance before the Superintendent of Police concerned in terms of Annexure P-2, no action has been taken upon the same, purportedly on the ground that this communication was never ::: Downloaded on - 29/12/2022 20:32:00 :::CIS 3 received in the office of Superintendent of Police concerned, as is evident from the reply filed by the respondent-State. But, the documents appended with the rejoinder clearly demonstrate that a .
representation was duly sent to the office of respondent No. 3 by way of a Registered Post.
6. Learned Additional Advocate General has submitted that de hors the fact as to whether Annexure P-2 was received or not, fact of the matter is that the complaint of the petitioner was gone into by the Police Authorities, as is evident from the reply filed by the State and whatever action was to be taken upon it already stands taken.
7. Mr. Bhanot again reiterated that once the petitioner had submitted a representation to the Superintendent of Police, then some action ought to have been taken upon the same by the Superintendent of Police concerned and he accordingly prays that the petition be disposed of by directing that let concerned Superintendent of Police take appropriate action in view of the averments contained in Annexure P-2.
8. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having carefully gone through the pleadings as well as the documents appended therewith, the petition is disposed of with the direction that the Superintendent of Police concerned will proceed with Annexure P-2, i.e., Communication, dated 03.06.202, addressed by the petitioner to the said authority and appropriate action be taken ::: Downloaded on - 29/12/2022 20:32:00 :::CIS 4 thereupon in accordance with law. It is made clear that this Court has not made any observation with regard to the merits of Annexure P-2 and the grievance, as has been raised by the petitioner therein .
shall be gone into by the Police, uninfluenced by the observations made by this Court in this order. The needful be done within two months from today. Miscellaneous applications, if any, also stand disposed of.
(Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge December 23, 2022 (bhupender) ::: Downloaded on - 29/12/2022 20:32:00 :::CIS