Chandi Ram vs State Of Haryana & Ors
2022 Latest Caselaw 14315 P&H

CRM-M-23719-2016                                                    1

201-3 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                   AT CHANDIGARH


                                            CRM-M-23719-2016
                                            Reserved on: 21.10.2022
                                            Date of decision : 15.11.2022

Chandi Ram                                                    .....Petitioner

                         versus

State of Haryana and others                                   ..... Respondents

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ
        ***

Present :-   Mr. Suneel Ranga, Advocate
             for the petitioner.

             Mr. Kirpal Singh Thakur, AAG, Haryana.

        ***
RAJESH BHARDWAJ, J.

Petitioner has approached this Court praying for transferring

the investigation in case FIR No.44 dated 20.05.2016, under Sections

306, 34 of IPC and Section 3 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled

Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, registered at Police Station

Government Railway Police, Panipat, District Panipat to CBI or some

independent agency.

Complainant is the author of FIR wherein he has submitted

that his daughter was serving as a Teacher at Government Primary

School, Kabri, Panipat. She was working there for the last about five

years. He alleged that the members of the school staff namely, Mukesh,

Dharambir, Tara Sir, Manju, Mam Suman, Mam Anju, Mam Simpal,

mother of the student Rajinder used to harass his deceased daughter

Manju Bala in connivance with each other. Regarding the harassment

being caused, she told to her husband Harikishan who thereafter, also

1 of 8

complained to Dharambir Sir, Tara Sir and to Former Sarpanch of Kabri

namely, Dhara Singh. Mam Simpal humiliated her by saying 'chamari'

before the school staff. He alleged that on account of the harassment and

humiliation caused by the accused, his daughter committed suicide. His

daughter jumped before the train along with her child, however, the child

survived but his daughter Manju Bala succumbed to the injuries. He

submits that he had handed over a suicide note of the deceased to the

investigating agencies the very next day i.e. on 20.05.2020. He made a

request to take legal action against the culprits. On the statement of the

complainant, the FIR was lodged and investigation commenced.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner

before this Court is the author of the FIR whose daughter has lost her life

due to high-handedness of the accused named in the FIR. He submits that

the precious life has been lost whereas, the investigating agencies being

hand in gloves with the accused have not investigated the allegations in

the FIR in a free and fair manner and thus, have carried out the

investigation to hush up the case and to shield the accused.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that surprisingly

the police started investigating the case in a tainted manner and thus, filed

the challan only against two of the accused namely, Simpal and Monika.

However, thereafter they filed supplementary challan under Section

173(8) Cr.P.C. against the third accused namely, Anju. He submits that

the investigating agencies did not collect the record pertaining to

collection of money i.e. Rs.100/- per student. He submits that the money

collected from the students was unauthorized and on raising the objection

by the parents, the amount of Rs.70,000/- approximately, had to be

2 of 8

returned. He has submitted that the petitioner being a member of the

Scheduled Caste Community was intentionally made a scapegoat by the

accused which compelled her to commit suicide. He has submitted that

there was a recording pertaining to conversation between the deceased

and the accused, however, the investigating agencies did not investigate

the same only in order to favour the accused. He has further submitted

that the mother of one student namely Rajinder, used to harass the

deceased Manju Bala, however, the investigating agencies did not

investigate the case qua accused Monika. He further submits that the CD

pertaining to the conversation has also been concealed by the

investigating agencies from learned Court. He submits that the material

witnesses namely, Kavita and Minakshi were also not joined as witnesses

by the investigating agencies. He vehemently submits that the deceased

had left suicide note wherein the complicity of all the accused has been

mentioned however, despite that the investigating agencies by conducting

a tainted investigation have challaned only two of the accused at initial

stage and one Anju by filing supplementary challan and thus, illegally

declared rest of the accused as innocent. He further submits that the

investigating agencies have failed to comply with the statutory provisions

of Section 7 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act

(hereinafter referred to as 'Atrocities Act'). He has submitted that as per

the statutory provisions of the Atrocities Act, the offence committed

under the Atrocities Act shall be investigated by a police officer not

below the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police. However, the case

has not been investigated by the DSP and thus, the investigation suffers

from a serious illegality.

3 of 8

Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the

Hon'ble Supreme Court judgment titled as Ram Bihari Vs. State of Bihar

and others, 1998(2) R.C.R. (Criminal) 403. Thus, he has submitted that

the investigating agencies have failed to carry out their duty under the law

and had conducted biased and partial investigation by concealing the

material witnesses from the trial Court and thus, have exonerated some of

the main accused. Hence, in the interest of justice, the investigation of the

case be transferred to CBI or some independent agency.

Learned State counsel has opposed the submissions made by

learned counsel for the petitioner. He has drawn the attention of this

Court to the reply filed on behalf of respondents No.1 to 6 by Ms. Shital

Singh Dhariwal, HPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police (H),

Headquarters, Ambala Cantt dated 23.07.2018 and affidavit of

Mr. Dheeraj Kumar, HPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Head

Quarter, GRP, Ambala Cantt dated 11.07.2022. He has submitted that the

investigating agencies have left no stone unturned in investigating the

case in hand thoroughly without any bias. He has submitted that all the

allegations levelled by the complainant were duly investigated.

Statements of the relevant persons were duly recorded and thus, after a

thorough investigation, no cogent and incriminating material was found

against rest of the persons named in FIR. He has submitted that on

receiving the information regarding the death of deceased on 19.05.2016,

SI Joginder Singh (respondent No.7) went to the spot along with the

officials and found a dead body lying on the railway track. On

identification of the same, proceedings under Section 174 Cr.P.C. were

initiated and the postmortem of the body was got conducted from Civil

4 of 8

Hospital, Panipat on 20.05.2016. The Doctor opined the cause of death is

shock and hemorrhage due to the injuries described therein which was

anti-mortem in nature and sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of

life. Possibility of railway accident could not be ruled out. He further

submits that on 20.05.2016, the petitioner-complainant made a complaint

and also handed over two pages suicide note of the deceased. In the

complaint, he made allegations against various members of the school

staff and the mother of the one student namely, Rajinder. He has

submitted that the investigation qua the allegation pertaining to

collection of Rs.100/- per student was enquired into, by joining the school

staff and the members of Panchayat,Village Kabri. On inquiry conducted,

it was found that the deceased was not humiliated by the school staff. Mr.

Tekan Raj, HPS, DSP, GRP, Headquarters, Ambala Cantt, carried out the

investigation qua Dharambir, Tara Chand, Mukesh and Suman and found

them not to have been involved in the case. The accused Simpal and

Monika were arrested on 27.05.2016 and accused Anju joined

investigation on 06.09.2016. During the course of investigation, the

complainant/petitioner produced the CD on 07.07.2016 containing

telephonic conversation between deceased Manju Bala and Kavita. The

CD was collected and deposited in the Maalkhana. The translated

conversation was prepared by the Investigating Officer but from the

transcription, no incriminating material found against the accused

persons. He has further submitted that the contentions raised by counsel

for the petitioner that there is a violation of Sections 7 and 14 of the

Atrocities Act, are totally false and without any rhyme and reason. He has

drawn the attention of this Court to the affidavit filed by Mr. Dheeraj

5 of 8

Kumar, HPS, DSP, Headquarter, GRP, Ambala Cantt. He submits that the

allegations made in the FIR and so in the suicide note, were thoroughly

investigated and hence, the case was registered under Sections 306/34 of

IPC and Section 3 of SC/ST Act. He submits that the investigation was

conducted by the then Mr. Jagdeep Singh, HPS, Deputy Superintendent

of Police, Railway Headquarter, Haryana, Ambala Cantt. as is recorded in

zimni report dated 20.05.2016. He further submits that finally,

investigation was completed by Mr.Teken Raj, HPS, GRP, HQ, Ambala

Cantt on transfer of Mr.Jagdeep Singh, DSP, GRP, HQ, Ambala Cantt. He

has submitted that E/SI Joginder Singh had already completed the

formalities under Section 174 Cr.P.C. and rest of the investigation was

completed by the then DSP GRP, HQ, Ambala Cantt. He has further

submitted that DSP Headquarter had recorded the statement of the

witnesses in the present case and also recorded the statements of the

respectable members of Gram Panchayat, school teachers and Head

Master of the school. Resultantly, he has submitted his final investigation

to SHO, GRP, Panipat for preparing challan under Section 173(8) Cr.P.C.

He has submitted that on a thorough investigation, Dharambir, Mukesh,

Suman and Tara were found innocent. Thereafter, the challan was filed

against accused Simpal and Monika on 19.07.2016 and supplementary

challan under Section 173(8) Cr.P.C. in respect of accused namely, Anju

was prepared on 24.10.2016 and forwarded to the learned trial Court on

09.11.2016. He submits that the investigating agencies have committed

no illegality in violating the statutory provisions of Sections 7 and 14 of

the Atrocities Act. He further submits that challan in the case is already

prepared and charges are also framed. He submits that this Court can

6 of 8

interfere in the investigation in case the Court finds the same to be

arbitrary and not having been found conducted in an impartial manner.

However, the investigating agencies have carried out the investigation

without any bias. He further submits that the learned Court has already

rejected the applications filed by the accused under Section 227 Cr.P.C.

and have framed the charges and thus, at this stage, the present petition

has rather become infructuous. He submits that the petition being devoid

of any merits deserves to be dismissed.

I have heard counsel for the parties and perused the record.

Admittedly, the deceased belong to the Scheduled Castes.

She committed suicide by jumping before the train. The matter was

reported to the police and a thorough inquiry was conducted by carrying

out the proceedings under Section 174 Cr.P.C. Thereafter, as submitted

before this Court, the investigation was conducted by the officer of the

rank of DSP as per mandate of Section 7 of the Atrocities Act. The

allegations pertaining to the CD were also enquired into. The

investigating agencies have also placed on record the transcription of the

CD. On examination of the same, nothing incriminating was found out.

The Investigating Officer also recorded the statements of the villagers and

that of the school staff and thus, found the allegations substantiated

against the accused Simpal and Monika and hence, filed the report under

Section 173 Cr.P.C. Thereafter, report under Section 173(8) Cr.P.C. was

filed against Anju.

On hearing counsel for the petitioner and perusing the

record, it is found that except the allegations made, there is nothing to

show that the investigation on the issues raised by the petitioner has not

7 of 8

been carried out in a free and fair manner. There is nothing on record to

support the contentions raised by counsel for the petitioner. It is apposite

to note that even if the challan is presented against three of the accused

that does not take away the right of the complainant in availing his

remedies under Section 319 Cr.P.C. in case he is able to convince the

Court at an appropriate stage of the trial. In what manner the investigation

is to be carried out, lies within the domain of the investigating agencies

and the Court should not dictate terms to the investigating agencies,

without there being a sufficient reason.

This Court is supported by the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme

Court in D.Venkatasubramaniam and others Vs. M.K. Mohan

Krishnamachara and another, 2009(4) R.C.R. (Criminal) wherein it has

been held that the High Court cannot direct the police to investigate the

case from a particular angle, arrest the accused and submit charge sheet.

In view of the overall facts and circumstances of the case, this Court does

not find any merit in the petition and hence, the same is dismissed.

Nothing said herein shall be treated as an expression of opinion on the

merits of the case.

                                            ( RAJESH BHARDWAJ )
15.11.2022                                        JUDGE
m. sharma

             Whether speaking/reasoned        :      Yes/No
             Whether reportable               :      Yes/No




                                   8 of 8