Punjab-Haryana High Court
Sarabjit Singh vs State Of Punjab And Others on 1 October, 2021
202 CRM-W-1268-2020 in
CRWP-7987-2020
Sarabjit Singh Vs State of Punjab and others
Present: Mr. Gulzar Mohammad, Advocate
for the applicants-petitioners.
Mr. Hitten Nehra, Addl. A.G., Punjab.
*****
[The aforesaid presence is being recorded through video conferencing since the
proceedings are being conducted in virtual court.]
Applicant-petitioner prays for modification/recalling of order
dated 06.10.2020 passed by this Court.
As per case of the petitioner, who claims to be a Non-Resident
Indian (NRI), respondents No.5 and 6 committed theft but the SHO, Police
Station, Tanda is not registering the FIR against the accused. The petitioner
is stated to have moved a complaint against respondents No.5 and 6 in this
regard before the Senior Superintendent of Police, Hoshiarpur.
When no action was taken by the Senior Superintendent of
Police on the representations made by the petitioner, he approached this
Court by way of CRWP No.7987 of 2020, which was disposed of vide order
dated 06.10.2020, observing that when there was an NRI Commission for
redressal of grievances of the NRIs, petitioner should approach before the
said Commission.
Now, the applicant-petitioner prays for modification/recalling
of said order dated 06.10.2020 on the ground that he came to know that the
order dated 06.10.2020 is against the finding recorded in a judgment dated
18.05.2005 in CWP No.18237 of 2003 titled as 'Jatt Ram Versus Punjab
State Human Rights Commission and another'. Further the NRI
Commission has no power to issue interim or ad interim orders and the
orders of the Commission are advisory in nature.
1 of 3
CRM-W-1268-2020 in -2-
CRWP-7987-2020
Notice of the application was issued.
As per reply filed by the State, it is categorically stated that the
allegations levelled by the petitioner against respondents No.5 and 6 have
been found to be false by the Superintendent of Police (Headquarters),
Hoshiarpur, therefore, the same were rightly recommended to be filed.
It is not disputed that State of Punjab has constituted an NRI
Commission for redressal of the grievances of the NRIs. However, the
stand of the applicant-petitioner is that Commission has no power to issue
interim or ad interim orders and the recommendations of the Commission
are advisory in nature.
Heard.
There is no dispute with regard to the settled proposition of law
that the orders/recommendations of the NRI Commission are advisory in
nature. The very purpose of establishing the said Commission was to
redress the grievances of the NRIs and then to recommend the action to be
taken against any offender/wrong doer against the said NRI. The said
recommendations might be advisory in nature but certainly have some legal
backing.
By way of filing the present application, the
modification/recalling of the order dated 06.10.2020 has been sought, which
to my mind, is not at all warranted. This Court, in its own wisdom, thought
it appropriate to direct the petitioner to approach the said Commission as his
grievance had already been dealt with by the police but no truth was found
in the allegations so levelled. Even if the petitioner was not satisfied with
the findings of the police, he was well within his right to knock the doors of
2 of 3
202 CRM-W-1268-2020 in
the competent court having the jurisdiction by way of moving the private
complaint as contemplated.
In view of the above, the present application is dismissed, being
devoid of any merit.
( SANT PARKASH )
01.10.2021 JUDGE
mks
3 of 3
