Sheela v. State Of Punjab And ANR

CRWP No. 831 of 2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRWP No. 831 of 2017 DATE OF DECISION :- February 02, 2018 Sheela

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab and another

...Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S. MADAAN Present:- None for the petitioner.

Mr. Ramandeep Sandhu, Sr. DAG, Punjab.

*** Petitioner Sheela has filed the present Criminal Writ Petition of Habeas Corpus for search of detenue Veeru @ Meero. There is no one to represent the petitioner. Similar was the position on the last date of hearing.

In reply filed on behalf of respondents it is contended that on 12.4.2016 one Gurmail Singh son of Piara Sigh resident of Noorpur Bet, P.S. Ladowal, District Ludhiana had informed the police regarding murder of his father-in-law Harbans Singh of Village Mohi. Formal F.I.R. No. 24 dated 12.4.2016 for offence under Section 302 IPC was registered at Police Station Jodhan. During investigation of that case name of Veeru @ Meero son of Neela Nath resident of Ward No. 12, Near Railway Station Mullanpur, District Ludhiana cropped up as an accused. Accordingly, he was arrested on 11.7.2017 and was taken to the office of DSP, Dakha on 2nd floor of the building for further interrogation. Veeru @ Meero went to the bathroom situated on 2nd floor of the building and jumped from there. Resultantly, he suffered multiple injuries. He was taken to Civil Hospital, Sudhar from where Parvinder Singh 2018.02.06 14:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

CRWP No. 831 of 2017 he was referred to Civil Hospital Ludhiana. His statement was recorded by JMIC, Ludhiana on 12.7.2017, wherein he stated regarding his jumping from the building and falling down. Since during investigation no evidence came on the record to connect Veeru @ Meero with the murder of Harbans Singh as such he was discharged from judicial custody on 21.7.2017. It is denied that Veeru @ Meero was illegally detained by the police or given beatings. Since the petitioner had not appeared in the Court on the last date of hearing and is being not represented in the Court today also, it seems that petitioner is not interested in further prosecution of the petitioner. Further more in view of the version given by respondent in the written reply, no further action in the matter is called for.

If the petitioner wants to take any action in the matter, she can take recourse to remedy available to her under law. Accordingly, the present petition stands dismissed. (H.S. MADAAN) JUDGE February 02, 2018 p.singh Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No Parvinder Singh 2018.02.