← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/12693/2024dismissed

Kuldeep Singh v. State Of Punjab And Others

2024-03-12Mr. Justice Harpreet Singh Brar2 pages

CRM-M No.12693 of 2024       

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM-M No.12693 of 2024 Date of Decision:12.03.2024 Kuldeep Singh ... Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab and others ... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR

Present:

Mr. Vishal Goel, Advocate for the petitioner.

*** HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J. (ORAL) 1.

The present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying for issuance of direction to respondents No.2 and 3 to take appropriate action as per law against the private respondents, who are threatening the petitioner to kill him and his family under the grudge of DDR No.31 dated 11.05.2023 registered by the petitioner against the private respondents. 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia contends that the private respondents are roaming freely and they are not being apprehended by the police, despite the fact that they are not granted concession of bail by any Court. It is further contended that it is a case of version and cross version and the private respondents and their associates are pressurizing the petitioner to withdraw the case filed by him. They are making phone calls through different numbers and threatening the family members of the petitioner with dire consequences. In this regard, he has filed a representation dated 27.02.2024 (Annexure P-3) to respondent No.2 praying for issuance of direction to concerned quarter to take action against the private respondents and their associates but till date, no action has been taken thereon.

PANKAJ KUMAR 2024.03.13 15:32 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

CRM-M No.12693 of 2024        3.

Per contra, Mr. Subhash Godara, Addl. A.G., Punjab, who appears on advance notice for the respondent-State submits that the present petition is totally misconceived and abuse of the process of law. DDR No.31 dated 11.05.2023 has been registered for offences under Sections 323, 341, 506, 34 IPC on the complaint made by the petitioner and all these offences are bailable. Furthermore, no specific details or the manner in which the petitioner has been threatened are given in the petition and the instant petition is merely a ploy to create pressure on the investigating agency. It is a case of version and cross version and the petitioner's version was promptly recorded whereupon DDR No.31 dated 11.05.2023 was registered.

4.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusing the record of the case, this Court finds no force in the argument advanced by the counsel appearing for the petitioner, rather it appears that the present petition is totally misconceived. The petitioner has approached this Court for a matter in which bailable offences are attracted with vague and omnibus allegations. The details regarding date, time and the manner in which the petitioner was threatened by the private respondents are totally missing in the pleadings. 5.

In view of the above, the present petition is dismissed with costs of Rs.10,000/- to be payable to the Poor Patients Welfare Fund, PGIMER, Chandigarh. The costs imposed shall be paid within a period of two weeks from today against due receipt, which shall be furnished in the registry by the petitioner.

(HARPREET SINGH BRAR) JUDGE March 12, 2024 Pankaj* Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No PANKAJ KUMAR 2024.03.13 15:32 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document