Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 6, Cited by 46]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Jai Pal Singh And Another vs State Of Haryana And Others on 25 November, 2013

Author: Rekha Mittal

Bench: Rekha Mittal

           CRM-M-28416-2011                                                                    1

             IN THE PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH

                                                           CRM-M-28416-2011
                                                           Date of decision : 25.11.2013

           Jai Pal Singh and another
                                                                             ... Petitioners

                                     Versus

           State of Haryana and others
                                                                             ... Respondents

           CORAM:              HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE REKHA MITTAL

           Present:            None for the petitioners.

                               Mr.Anupam Sharma, AAG, Haryana
                               for respondents No.1 to 4.

           REKHA MITTAL, J.(ORAL)

The instant petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been preferred by the petitioners for issuance of directions to the official respondents to protect their life, liberty as well as property.

The plea of the petitioners is that house of the petitioners was forcibly locked by the private respondents. Their household chattels were thrown out of the house and they are not permitted to enter their agricultural land and cultivate the same since 2008. Another plea of the petitioners is that they are receiving threats from the respondents not to enter the village, otherwise they would be done to death.

Sumit Kumar, D.S.P. (Headquarter), Rohtak filed reply on behalf of respondents No.1 to 4 (official respondents) and in turn denied averments in the petition with the plea that the petitioners are still residing in their house in village Ismaila (9B). They are taking care of agriculture land and managing all the affairs. The Sarpanch of the village namely Davinder Kumar 2013.12.03 17:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-28416-2011 2 Bhoop Singh, Ex-Sarpanch Sunil Kumar presently member of Zila Parishad had given in writing that the petitioners are residing in village Ismaila and no one is interfering in their family life. It has been pointed out that FIR No.87 dated 25.09.2009 was registered against the petitioners, Sheela, their maternal aunt and Naveen Kumar son of petitioners in Police Station, Civil Line, Rohtak for offence under Sections 341, 506, 34 IPC. Another FIR bearing No.214 dated 01.09.2008 under Section 364 IPC was registered against Naveen Kumar son of the petitioners for kidnapping Ravinder son of Satbir. The private respondents namely Dalbir, Angrej, Satbir Singh and Sat Pal @ Kala are the witnesses in FIR No.214 in which the son of the petitioners has been convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for life.

The petitioners initially engaged Mr.Rajbir Sehrawat, Advocate. Later, on two occasions petitioner No.1 appeared in person. Thereafter, they engaged one Rakesh Dhiman Advocate. Mr.Rakesh Dhiman, Advocate withdrew his power of attorney and he was replaced by Mr.N.L.Sharma, Advocate. Counsel for the petitioners failed to appear and make submissions.

In view of reply filed by the officials respondents, I do not think it to be a fit case wherein the petitioners deserve indulgence of this Court for issuance of any direction in exercise of extra ordinary jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code.

Disposed of accordingly.

(REKHA MITTAL) JUDGE November 25, 2013.

Davinder Kumar Davinder Kumar 2013.12.03 17:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document