Yogesh Kataria And Another v. State Of Haryana And Others
IN N THE HIGH COURT OF PUN NJAB & HARYANA AT ARH CHANDIGA Civil Writ Petit tion No. 26614 of 2021(O&M) Decision: 18.09.2024 Date of D Kataria and another Yogesh K State of H Present :
.....Petitioners versus Haryana and others .....Respondents
Mr. RS Randhawa, Advocate Mr. Anuj Chauhan, Advocate Mr. Tarranum Madan, Advoc e, e and cate, for the petitioners.
Mr. Deepak Balyan, Addl. A Advocate General, Haryana.
Mr. Rohan Moudgil, Advoca Mr. Sandeep Sharma, Advoc ate for cate, for respondent No.2.
Mr. Navkiran Singh, Advoca CM No. 8045CWP52022.
ate for the applicant in ****
CM No. 804-CWP-2022 For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is s allowed a and the applicant, namely, Geet ta widow of Rajesh, resident of f village V Vikas Nagar, NFL Panipat, is ordered to be impleaded as s responden nt No.6 to the petition.
Civil Writ Petition No. 2661 14-2021 (O&M) 1.
This petition has been filed assailing the recommendations s made by the Haryana Human Rights Commission vide order dated d 05.03.202 21 (Annexure P-6), which are to the following effect:-
2
!
"# $ !%& !'( !" ")* %+,- .
/
0 ,1) + 2
!)!! -
0 3
004 3 &
4
0
0
2 50 $ , 0 -2 , - - 0- 1 0
,
6
7
0 0 8
7 07 0 - - 0 0 0
0-
!)!!-
0 - ,1) + 2
0 0 9
$ :
""
"""7) ; 0
< 6
7
* $ :
0 0
.
0 ! 0 ! "# $ !%(7!"7!& +, + 0 $ , * + .
- $
= :
0
+ 0 2- 0 0
0 0
0 - - 0 - -
+ 0 >
0
0 0 -
0 0 0
1
0 ,
3 & 1 -
,
$ - :
2-
6
7
?
2.
From the aforesaid it is evident that essentially there were three recommendations made by the Commission, which are to the extent outlined below:- i) Rs. 7 lacs be paid by the State Government to the next of the kin of the deceased and the same be recovered from the erring officials (both of them are the petitioners herein); ii) Disciplinary proceedings be initiated by the Director General of Police, Haryana against the accused named in the FIR (including the petitioners herein);
iii) Any statement made during investigation in regard to the culpability of the petitioners and other accused in the FIR should not obstruct the prosecuting agency in nailing the perpetrators of crime in question.
3.
However, learned counsel appearing for the State of Haryana by filing a reply has inter-alia disclosed that disciplinary proceedings initiated against the petitioners have resulted in exoneration, which fact is not denied by learned counsel for the petitioners. Moreover, with respect to the amount of compensation of Rs.7 lacs, the State counsel informs that the next kin of the deceased person has already been paid the said amount of compensation. The only question remaining is regarding recovery of said amount from the petitioners. 4.
It is also informed by learned State counsel that criminal charge-sheet had been filed against the petitioners on 06.12.2022,
4 alleging offences punishable under Sections 342, 323, 166, 166-A, 166-B read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. It is not known as to what charges have been framed against the petitioners but the parties do not dispute that at present the trial is in progress. 5.
In view of the aforesaid changed circumstances, this Court is of the considered view that the question of recovery of amount of Rs. 7 lacs from the petitioners shall depend upon the fate of the trial. Therefore, recovery proceedings against the petitioners will have to await conclusion of the trial.
6.
With regard to the last direction about nailing the culprits, it is made clear that this direction shall not prejudice the rights otherwise available to an accused in the trial.
7.
With respect to the quantum of compensation of Rs. 7 lacs, the next kin of the deceased will reserve their right to claim further compensation, if entitled under the law.
8.
With these observations, the petition stands disposed of. 9.
All the pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (SHEEL NAGU) CHIEF JUSTICE (ANIL KSHETARPAL) JUDGE 18.09.2024 ravinder sharma Whether speaking/reasoned √Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No√