Amarjeet Singh Gandhi v. State Of Punjab And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM-M-No.5244 of 2022 (O&M) DATE OF DECISION: 08.02.2022 Amarjeet Singh Gandhi .....Petitioner versus State of Punjab and others .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ALKA SARIN

Present:

Mr. Vaneet Kumar Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner ..

ALKA SARIN, J. (Oral):

Heard in virtual mode.

This is a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for issuance of directions to the official respondents for conducting a fair and impartial inquiry into the representations dated 15.11.2019 (Annexure P-2), dated 14.10.2020 (Annexure P-3) and dated 23.08.2021 (Annexure P-4).

Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the petitioner has been defrauded and duped by the private respondent Nos.6 to 12 on the pretext of entering into an agreement to sell qua the sale of a piece of land in Ludhiana. The learned counsel has candidly admitted that a suit

CRM-M-No.5244 of 2022 -2for specific performance has already been instituted in which an injunction has already been granted in his favour. The learned counsel would further contend that in this regard a complaint was given to the Economic Offences Wing, Ludhiana and the inquiry was entrusted to ASI Mohinder Singh Saini but no legal action has been taken against the accused. It is further the contention that the private respondents are threatening and forcing the petitioner to withdraw his suit. In this regard, numerous representations have been given, however, no action has been taken. Notice of motion.

On the asking of the Court, Mr. H.S. Multani AAG Punjab has joined the session through video conferencing and accepts notice on behalf of the official respondents.

Learned State counsel, on instructions from Inspector Jaskamal Singh Sidhu, SHO, Police Station Sarabha Nagar, has stated that the petitioner is a habitual complainant and has filed as many as 25 complaints against various persons. It has further been stated that the agreement to sell is of the year 2013 and, as stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner himself, a suit for specific performance qua the same has already been instituted against the private respondents. It is further stated by the learned State counsel that the complaint before the Economic Offences Wing was inquired into and has since been filed. Learned State counsel has further pointed out, on instructions, that none of the representations appended with the petition have been received. It is further stated that the grievance of the petitioner would, however, be looked into by respondent No.3. Heard.

CRM-M-No.5244 of 2022 -3In view of the statement made by learned counsel for the State that none of the representations appended with the petition have been received, the present petition is disposed off with a direction to respondent No.3 to treat the present petition as a representation and decide the same in accordance with law.

Disposed off.

(ALKA SARIN) JUDGE 08.02.2022 parkash NOTE:

Whether speaking/non-speaking: Speaking Whether reportable: YES/NO