← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/46469/2024disposed of

Kamaljit Kaur v. State Of Punjab And ORS

2024-09-18Mrs. Justice Manjari Nehru Kaul2 pages

CRM-M-46469-2024 -1IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-46469-2024 Decided on: 18.09.2024 Kamaljit Kaur .... Petitioner versus State of Punjab and others .... Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL

Present:

Mr. B.S.Baath, Advocate for the petitioner.

**** Manjari Nehru Kaul, J. (Oral) Prayer in the instant petition is for issuance of appropriate direction to respondents No.1 and 2 to conclude the inquiry on the complaint dated 05.08.2024 (Annexure P-1) made by the petitioner against respondents No.3 to 6.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that vide complaint dated 05.08.2024 (Annexure P-1) the respondent No.2 had been duly intimated about the attack on the petitioner by the private respondents. However, the authorities concerned had failed to initiate any action against the offenders. Learned counsel contends that despite respondent No.2 having been apprised about the commission of cognizable offence by the private respondents, the official respondents had failed to proceed against them under the provisions of law. It has been further submitted that the official respondents were under a legal obligation to pass an appropriate order on the complaint SONIA BURA 2024.09.19 10:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M-46469-2024 -2made by the petitioner. It has also been submitted that the petitioner would be satisfied if directions are issued to the authorities concerned to take appropriate steps on the complaint moved by the petitioner. 3.

Notice of motion.

4.

On the asking of the Court, Mr. Navdeep Singh, DAG, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State. 5.

In the wake of the limited prayer of the petitioner, the respondent No.2 i.e. Senior Superintendent of Police, Jalandhar Rural, is directed to look into her grievance and take appropriate steps, if any required, under the provisions of law. However, if respondent No.2 does not find the commission of any cognizable offence as alleged or any substance in the allegations levelled in the complaint dated 05.08.2024 (Annexure P-1), then the petitioner shall be duly informed as per the parameters laid down by the Supreme Court in Lalita Kumari v. Government of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. 2013 (4) RCR (Criminal) 979.

18.09.2024 (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) sonia JUDGE Whether speaking/non-speaking?

Yes/No Whether reportable?

Yes/No SONIA BURA 2024.09.19 10:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document