Surjit Singh v. Ut Of Chandigarh And Others

CRM-M-26469-2024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-26469-2024 Decided on: 23.05.2024 Surjit Singh

...Petitioner

Versus

Union Territory Chandigarh and others

...Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA

Present:

Mr. Pushp Jain, Advocate For the petitioner.

Mr. Manish Bansal, PP, UT Chandigarh with Mr. Shubham Mangla, Advocate for the respondent-UT.

**** ANOOP CHITKARA, J.

FIR No.

Dated Police Station Sections 06.12.2023 Sector 17, 420 IPC Chandigarh Seeking direction to respondents No.1 to 3 to transfer the investigation of the above captioned FIR, to some independent agency or senior police officials as the petitioner is not expecting fair and impartial investigation from respondents No.4 & 5, , the petitioner, has come up before this court by filing the present petition under Section 482 CrPC.

2.

Notices are served upon the official respondents through the State's counsel. Given the nature of the order that this Court proposes to pass, neither the response of official respondents nor the issuance of notices to the private respondents is required. 3.

Counsel for the State on instructions submits that the representation is very old bearing date as 12.02.2024 and now the police has already arrested two of the accused and anticipatory bail of one of the accused is pending. He further submits that challan against two of the accused, has already been filed. ANJU RANI 2024.05.24 18:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court Chandigarh

CRM-M-26469-2024 4.

Given above, there is nothing in the present petition. 5.

At this stage, petitioner's counsel submits that he would be contended and satisfied if he is permitted to file a fresh representation and the same is decided in time bound manner.

6.

Given above, let the petitioner represent the concerned Senior Superintendent of Police/ Commissioner of Police, within two weeks from today. If the petitioner files a representation with in the above-mentioned time period of two weeks, then, the same shall be decided by the concerned Senior Superintendent of Police/ Commissioner of Police, within two months, either himself/herself or by authorizing and delegating it to any officer of State level cadre. It is clarified that such order must be a reasoned order, and the same be communicated to the representationists as well as his counsel, without any delay. In the representation, petitioner to mention the e-mail-id of his counsel so that the concerned officer could communicate them outcome. 7.

Liberty reserved to the petitioner to file fresh petition or to take other legal remedies in accordance with the law.

8.

It is clarified that there is no adjudication on merits. It is further clarified that this order shall not come in the way if the interrogation of the petitioner is required in any cognizable case.

9.

There would be no need for a certified copy of this order, and any Advocate for the Petitioner and State can download this order and other relevant particulars from the official web page of this court and attest it to be a true copy. The concerned officer can also verify its authenticity and may download and use the downloaded copy for immediate use.

Petition is disposed to the extent mentioned above. All pending applications, if any, stand disposed.

(ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE 23.05.2024 Anju rani Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes Whether reportable:

No.

ANJU RANI 2024.05.24 18:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court Chandigarh