Punjab-Haryana High Court
Neha Monga vs State Of Haryana on 24 September, 2013
Author: Rekha Mittal
Bench: Rekha Mittal
Crl. Misc. No. M- 27332 of 2013(O&M) -1-
In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh
Crl. Misc. No. M- 27332 of 2013(O&M)
Date of Decision:24.9.2013
Neha Monga
---Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana
---Respondent
Coram: Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Rekha Mittal
***
Present:- Mr.Sanjeev Sharma, Advocate,
for the petitioner
***
REKHA MITTAL, J.
Through the present petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short "the Code"), the petitioner prays for re-opening/re-investigation of FIR No. 6 dated 5.1.2007 for offence under Sections 342, 364, 307, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short "IPC"), registered at Police Station Padav, District Ambala and to hand over the enquiry to some independent agency/CBI/SIT.
Counsel for the petitioner contends that the police submitted cancellation of the aforesaid FIR in a hushed up manner without informing the petitioner nor she received any intimation from the Court of Magistrate regarding cancellation of the FIR. It is further submitted that the petitioner has suffered because of high handedness of the Haryana Police, therefore, the investigation in regard to allegations contained in the aforesaid FIR is liable to be handed over to some independent agency. Saini Paramjit Kaur
I have heard counsel for the petitioner and gone through the 2013.09.30 14:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh Crl. Misc. No. M- 27332 of 2013(O&M) -2- case file.
A perusal of the record reveals that with regard to the same FIR, the petitioner earlier approached this Court and filed CRM No. M- 6187 of 2007 which was disposed of by this Court on 27.8.2008. A relevant extract from order passed on 27.8.2008 (Annexure P-4) reads as follows:-
"The counsel for the respondent has submitted that the inquiry was conducted in this case and ultimately the cancellation report was submitted before the concerned Court with the approval of the authority concerned. He has further submitted that the competent Court of jurisdiction at Ambala Cantt. accepted the cancellation report on 15.3.2007.
In view of the above the counsel for the petitioner has submitted that he be permitted to withdraw the petition and if need be the petitioner will challenge the order accepting the cancellation report by the Court concerned. The prayer is allowed.
In view of the above, the instant petition is dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty as aforesaid."
The order aforesaid makes it manifest that the petitioner knowing fully well that the cancellation report has been submitted before the Court concerned and the same has been accepted on 15.3.2007, withdrew her petition with liberty to challenge the cancellation report. The petitioner either did not challenge the cancellation report or was unsuccessful in her challenge. If the petitioner had not challenged the cancellation report, it shows that she remained silent for a period of over five years after gaining knowledge that the FIR lodged at her instance has Saini Paramjit Kaur 2013.09.30 14:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh Crl. Misc. No. M- 27332 of 2013(O&M) -3- been cancelled by the police and the cancellation report has been accepted by the Court concerned. On the contrary, if she had filed a petition challenging the cancellation report and remained unsuccessful, she cannot be allowed to agitate the same matter before this Court. It is not the plea either that she withdrew the earlier petition under some mistaken impression nor she has filed the petition for revival of proceedings.
In this view of the matter, I do not think it to be a fit case where the petitioner deserves indulgence of this Court in exercise of extraordinary jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code.
Dismissed.
( Rekha Mittal ) Judge 24.9.2013 paramjit Saini Paramjit Kaur 2013.09.30 14:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh