High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRWP/9513/2020disposed of

Mohammad Shaukeen v. State Of Haryana And ORS

2020-12-18Mr. Justice Amol Rattan Singh5 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 18.12.2020 Mohammad Shaukeen

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana

...Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMOL RATTAN SINGH Present:- Mr. Talim Hussain, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. B.S. Virk, DAG, Haryana.

***** AMOL RATTAN SINGH, J. (Oral) All the cases listed today have been taken up for hearing by way of video conferencing because of the situation existing due to the Covid-19 pandemic.

On 01.12.2020, the following order had been passed:-

!" # $ %

' '& #

$ ( )

# + # $, -

. /# 0 &1 &

& +2

# 3&

4& 5&

* 3!$

$ (

$, -$

-21 /

6 &

& # *

3 /

/ &/&

# $ .$ / / &

7& 5&

# ##

3 & 7#&

3 &7#&

& ##

#$ 1

# ##

3 & 7#$ 5 #

'0 '

8 ## #

& #

& !

$ 9

-3- &

3 & 7#&

*.$1 #5 &

$ 1 ##

3 & 7#&

)

$ 2

-"$:$:-:-$

&.$1 #5 &

& 2

# # #

& &

$ 1& &.$/ / &

7&5& #

.$1 #5

& .$ 1 # 5 #

/5 '#

$; Obviously, as has been recorded above, in the last paragraph of the first page of that order, as regards the petitioner himself, his grievance stood redressed and therefore the petition had in fact been rendered infructuous; however, in view of what had been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that he himself had been detained, the matter had

-4been kept pending, with the Commissioner of Police, Gurugam, directed to file an affidavit, giving the circumstances in which the counsel had been put under arrest, also annexing therewith the daily diary/general diary report, pertaining to his arrest and release thereafter. It has been also recorded in the last part of that order after the aforesaid direction had been given, that learned State counsel who had appeared on that date, had stated (on instructions received by him), that the counsel for the petitioner had been released and was never actually arrested, though learned counsel for the petitioner submitted at that stage that he was still in the police station which seemed to be correct. Be that as it may, thereafter on 09.12.2020, it was recorded in the order that no affidavit of the Commissioner of Police had been filed and that counsel for the State could not appear on that date due to some personal difficulty.

Today, an affidavit of the Commissioner of Police is on record, dated 05.12.2020, giving therein the circumstances of the detention of learned counsel along with many others, essentially due to the reason (as per the affidavit) that 24 persons were stopped coming from the side of Mewat to Gurugram, including the learned counsel, and despite they having been informed of the order passed under the provisions of Section 144 of the Cr.P.C., they did not pay any heed to the instructions of the police and tried to breach the peace, after which 21 of them were taken to the police station in buses and eventually proceedings under Section 107/151 of the Cr.P.C. were also initiated against them, and they were placed under arrest.

-5Learned counsel however submits that in fact the said affidavit is contrary to what was recorded by this court in the order dated 01.12.2020, to the effect that he had not been arrested.

Having considered the aforesaid, it is to be again observed that this court had continued with this petition only because of the 'emergent' situation seemingly arising on the contention raised by the counsel for the petitioner as regards his own illegal detention but the main petition itself had been rendered infructuous. Consequently, it is disposed of as such. Naturally, as regards any illegal detention of the counsel for the petitioner, as he is even now contending, he would have his independent remedies against any such action, for which even liberty need not be given, with such liberty always being available with any citizen. If any such proceedings are intiated by learned counsel, obviously he would also be at liberty to refer to the affidavit of the Commissioner of Police, Gurugram, dated 05.12.2020, as has been placed on record in this case.

Again naturally, this court has not made any comment on the merits either of the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner as regards his illegal detention, nor in fact on the correctness of what is stated in the affidavit of the Commissioner of Police, Gurugram, which would be considered by a competent court in any appropriate proceeding, if initiated by Mr. Talim Hussain.

18.12.2020 (AMOL RATTAN SINGH) vcgarg JUDGE