Punjab-Haryana High Court
Dinesh Beniwal vs Rajesh Kumar And Another on 24 August, 2023
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:111529
COCP-2587-2023 (O&M) -1-
[Neutral Citation No.2023:PHHC:111529]
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND
HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
COCP-2587-2023 (O&M)
Date of decision: 24.08.2023
Dinesh Beniwal ...Petitioner
Versus
Rajesh Kumar and another ...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN
Present:- Mr. Yashdeep Nain, Advocate
for the petitioner.
ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN, J. (Oral)
The petitioner is alleging violation of the order dated
01.10.2021, passed by this Court in CRM-M-41182-2021, which reads as
under:
"The matter has been taken up through video
conferencing.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that at
this stage, he would be satisfied if directions are issued
to respondent No.2 - Superintendent of Police,
Fatehabad to consider and take a final decision on
representation dated 08.02.2021 (Annexure P-5) made
by the petitioner.
Learned State counsel, who appears on advance
notice, has no objection if the above prayer is accepted.
After hearing learned counsel for the parties, the
present petition is disposed of with a direction to
respondent No.2 - Superintendent of Police, Fatehabad
to forthwith consider the grievance(s) raised by the
petitioner in the aforesaid representation made to him/her
1 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:111529
COCP-2587-2023 (O&M) -2-
[Neutral Citation No.2023:PHHC:111529]
and take action thereupon as he/she deems fit, in
accordance with law."
A perusal of the aforesaid order shows that neither the facts of
the case were recorded nor any opinion was formed, while issuing directions
to Superintendent of Police, Fatehabad that a cognizable offence is made
out and only the only direction was to decide the representation.
In compliance thereof, the Superintendent of Police, Fatehabad,
on 10.05.2023, has passed the following order:
"That order dated 01.10.2021 passed by the
Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court Chandigarh in
CRM-M No. 41182 of 2021 titled "Dinesh Benival Vs
State of Haryana & Others" was received in this office
whereby the Hon'ble Puniab and Haryana High Court
disposed of the aforesaid writ petition with the following
directions:-
"...After hearing learned counsel for the parties,
the present petition is disposed of with a direction to
respondent No.2 - Superintendent of Police, Fatehabad to
forthwith consider the grievance(s) raised by the
petitioner in the aforesaid representation made to him/her
and take action thereupon as he/she deems fit, in
accordance with law..."
Whereas in compliance of the directions discussed
above, the case file was perused. It was alleged that vide
representation dated 08.02.2021 (Annexure P-5), the
petitioner stated that a case bearing No. 50-7VCL titled
"Gram Panchayat Dhabi Kalan Vs Rajbir etc." w/s 7 of
Punjab Village Common Land Act, 1961, was pending
before the Court of District Development & Panchayat
Officer- cum A.C. First-Grade, Fatehabad. Vide Order dt.
08.01.2020, the above case was disposed off as
dismissed in default and the file was consigned to record
2 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:111529
COCP-2587-2023 (O&M) -3-
[Neutral Citation No.2023:PHHC:111529]
room. After that the petitioner obtained certified copy of
afore said order. Thereafter, Partap Singh, Vinod &
Rakesh conspired with each other and on their instance
DDPO, Assistant District Attorney and Reader to Court
of DDPO-Cum-AC First Grade restored the aforesaid
case by falsely indicating the presence of both parties
and fixed the case for 03.02.2020. The representationist
alleged that the case was restored in the absence of
respondents. The representationist also said that the case
was restored 20 days after the order dated 8.1.2020 and
the entry regarding restoration of the case was made in
the same order dated 08.01.2020 by tampering with the
order.
In order to find out the truth, the then
Superintendent of Police ordered DSP, Fatehabad
(Traffic) to conduct an inquiry into the matter.
Thereafter, DSP, Fatehabad (Traffic) submitted his report
on 18.05.2021. The undersigned ordered DSP, Fatehabad
to enquire into the matter again and he submitted his
report on 03.05.2023.
I have gone through the record available on the
case file as well-as enquiry report dated 18.05.2021
submitted by DSP, Traffic Fatehabad and enquiry report
dated 03.05.2023 submitted by DSP Fatehabad. It has
been found that a case bearing No. 50-7VCL Us 7 of
VCL Act was filed by the Gram Panchayal, Dhabi Kalan,
against Rajbir Singh (brother of representationist) and
others. The said case was disposed off as dismissed in
default by DDPO-cum-AC 1st Grade vide order dated
08.01.2020 and file was consigned to Record Room.
After some days, it came to the notice of DDPO that the
law officer representing the Gram Panchayat was present
in the court on 08.01.2020. Then, he gave direction to his
Reader Surjeet Singh to restore the case. Upon which,
3 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:111529
COCP-2587-2023 (O&M) -4-
[Neutral Citation No.2023:PHHC:111529]
Reader Surjeet Singh made an addendum in the aforesaid
order dated 08.01.2020 to restore the case instead of
passing a separate order and the case was fixed for
03.02.2020. The order now reads as "ADA (P) is present
on behalf of applicant and counsel for respondent also
present. Now the case file fixed for 03.02.2020 after
restoration." After hearing both the parties, DDPO-cum
AC First grade decided the aforesaid case in favor of
Gram Panchayat Dhabi Kalan on 14.01.2021( One year
after restoring the case). The representationist moved an
application before the then Superintendent of Police on
08.02.2021. Thereafter, representationist and others filed
an appeal against the order dated 14.01.2021 before the
Court of District Collector, Fatehabad. The same was
dismissed by the Court of Collector, Fatehabad vide
order dated 21.12.2022 by not giving any weight-age to
the contentions/allegations made by the representationist
in this regard. The land of Gram Panchayat, Dhabi Kalan
was found to be in illegal possession of the
representationist and his family members.
As per enquiry report dated 03.05.2023 submitted
by DSP Fatehabad, no cognizable offence is made out in
the present matter. The matter relates to Court
proceedings. In these circumstances, no criminal action
is made out in the present matter. Hence, the
representation is hereby disposed off accordingly."
Learned counsel for the petitioner, when confronted with the
aforesaid order, admits that an order has been passed by the Superintendent
of Police, Fatehabad, however, he referred to a judgment of Hon'ble
Supreme Court dated 08.08.2023, passed in the Criminal Appeal arising out
of SLP (Crl.) No. 5883 of 2020, wherein while relying upon Lalita Kumari
vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. (2014) 2 SCC 1, it is held that where a
4 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:111529
COCP-2587-2023 (O&M) -5-
[Neutral Citation No.2023:PHHC:111529]
cognizable offence is disclosed, the police official cannot avoid his duty of
registering an FIR.
A perusal of the speaking order, passed by the Superintendent
of Police, Fatehabad clearly shows that a preliminary enquiry was
conducted by the then Superintendent of Police on 18.05.2021 and again, a
fresh enquiry through DSP, Fatehabad was conducted on 03.05.2023, on the
basis of which, the Superintendent of Police, Fatehabad has formed an
opinion that no cognizable offence is made out in the present case.
The arguments raised by learned counsel for the petitioner that
no enquiry was required is of no avail as it is the petitioner himself who got
a direction from this Court to decide his representation and, therefore, the
Superintendent of Police was bound to follow the direction.
In view of the above, no willful disobedience is made out.
Dismissed.
24.08.2023 (ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN)
Waseem Ansari JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether reportable Yes/No
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:111529
5 of 5
