Harbhajan Singh vs State of Punjab

T.H.B. Chalapathi, J.

This petition is filed to direct the respondents to comply with the orders, passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patiala, dated 25.6.1999 whereby he directed an investigation into the averments made in the complaint under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

According to the reply, on 20.6.1999, Inspector Devinder Singh who is also SHO Police Station Kotwali, Nabha received a secret information that one Jasbir Singh son of Harbans Singh and one Kala Singh and 5 others were selling poppy husk near Mehas Bir. On the said information a case was registered in FIR No. 37 dated 20.6.1999 and the Police Party proceeded and reached Mehas Bir and found Jasbir Singh, Kala Singh and others at the place. On seeing the police party, accused started running away. Then the police chased the accused and also sent a message to Police Lines Patiala. Meanwhile ASI Ram Avtar along with other police officials reached and joined the police party headed by Inspector Devinder Singh. When Constable Jasbir Singh tried to catch hold of one of the smugglers, he caused the injury to the constable. It is further alleged that the horses on which the Police Party went were also injured. It is also averred that one of the smugglers fired a shot from .12 born gun to save the cosmugglers from Police Constable Jasbir Singh which hit the smuggler in the right shoulder and in the meantime smugglers escaped. Thereupon a case was registered in FIR No. 235 dated 20.6.1999 for the offences under Sections 307/148/149, IPC, 25/27/54/59 of the Arms Act and 15/61/85 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act against Kala Singh, Jasbir Singh and other accused persons. It is also stated that the poppy husk and gandasi were recovered from one of the injured smugglers namely Jajwinder Singh and that injured person was taken to Rajindra Hospital where he was declared as brought dead. It was also averred that a sum of Rs. 7,100/ were recovered from Jajwinder Singh. It is also averred in the reply that there are several cases pending against him.

I need not go into the other details contained in the reply. According to the petitioners, petitioners and other persons filed a private complaint before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patiala. According to the said complaint on 18.6.1999 Inspector Devinder Singh and other police officials came to the houses of Jajwinder Singh, Angrej Singh, Pargat Singh, Jasbir Singh, Chinder Singh and Ram Singh and told the panchayat of the village that their houses have to be searched and in the presence of Sarpanch and others, a search was conducted and a sum of Rs. 10,000/ was taken into possession from the house of Jajwinder Singh, a sum of Rs. 11,000/ was taken from into possession from the house of Angrej Singh; a sum of Rs. 10,500/ was taken from the house of Pargat Singh, a sum of Rs. 9,800/ was taken the house of Jasbir Singh and Rs. 10,000/ were taken from the house of Chinder Singh and some gold ornaments and 5 mares were also taken into possession by the Police party. On 19.6.1999 Sarpanch Harbhajan Singh and others went to the Police Station Ghagga where the Inspector Devinder Singh and DSP Jagjit Singh Gill and SP Kewal Kumar were sitting and the members of the Panchayat required the police officials to release the persons taken into custody on 18.6.1999. It is further averred that on 20.6.1999 the relations of Jajwinder Singh received a message that Jajwinder Singh has been murdered in a police encounter and the petitioners also read in news item in regard to that encounter.

Thus while according to Police Jasbir Singh and others were selling poppy husk, the Police party went to the place and when they tried to catch them, the accused tried to run away and the police chased them and in that process one of the Constables was injured and one Jajwinder Singh was killed and two of the mares used by the Police Officials had died and some others have sustained injuries whereas it is the case of the petitioners that Jajwinder Singh and others have been taken into police custody on 18.6.1999 and Jajwinder Singh was killed in a false encounter and in regard to the same they filed a complaint before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patiala on 25.6.1999 and the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patiala referred the complaint to the police under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure by order dated 28.6.1999. Thus, there is a version and crossversion. According to the learned Public Prosecutor the private complaint was filed to set up defence.

It is pertinent to note in regard to the incident that took place on 20.6.1999, a case in FIR No. 235 dated 20.6.1999 has been registered and an investigation has been conducted into the same by the Police and a charge sheet has also been filed and the case was committed to sessions and the accused in the case has been facing trial before the Court of Sessions. When in regard to the same incident, an FIR was already registered and investigation was conducted by the Police, no useful purpose will be served by sending the case or to continue the investigation or inquiry in pursuance of the order of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patiala, under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. I, therefore, quash the order of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patiala, dated 28.6.1999.

But the matter does not end there. A private complaint has been filed by the petitioner before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patiala. It has to be taken to its logical end. Therefore, I direct the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patiala, before whom the petitioner filed a private complaint, to proceed with the same in accordance with the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure and if he feels that a case is made out for taking cognizance of the same, on the basis of the averments on the complaint, take cognizance of the same and if there is a material produced by the petitioners for committing the case to sessions, he may do so and if he does not find any material for committing the case to Sessions, he may drop the proceedings. Needless to say that the Magistrate is to act on the basis of the material placed before him. Since the sessions case on the basis of the police report in FIR No. 235 dated 20.6.1999 is already committed and pending before the Court of Sessions, the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate may pass appropriate order on the complaint filed by the petitioners within two months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

Petition is accordingly disposed of.