Punjab-Haryana High Court
Parkash vs State Of Haryana And Others on 13 December, 2023
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:162783
2023:PHHC:162783
IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT
CHANDIGARH
251 CWP-9748-2022
Date of Decision: 13.12.2023
PARKASH
... Petitioner
VERSUS
STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS
... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD S. BHARDWAJ.
****
Present: Mr. Rajesh Khandelwal, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. Pankaj Mulwani, DAG, Haryana.
****
VINOD S. BHARDWAJ, J. (ORAL)
The present petition has been filed for seeking issuance of
directions to the respondents to consider the complaint dated 30.10.2021
(Annexure P-21) and to lodge an FIR in view of the judgment/directions issued
by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of 'Lalita Kumari Versus
Government of U.P.', reported as (2014) 1 SCC (Criminal) 524 as well as
advisory dated 12.10.2015 issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs.
Counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner is a senior
citizen of 70 years of age and belongs to Scheduled Caste and works as a field
labour on Hissa Batai in the fields of accused Sunil @ Sonu son of Balwan and
his father, both residents of village Thurana, Tehsil Hansi, District Hisar
(having 37 acres of land on contract) since 2019 alongwith his other family
members. He argued that the hand of Savitri -wife of the petitioner was
fractured and the petitioner requested the accused persons to pay the wages for
1 of 9
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:162783
CWP-9748-2022 -2- 2023:PHHC:162783
treatment of his wife, however, the accused refused to do the needful and hurled
abuses in the name of the caste of the petitioner and also gave beatings to him.
A threat was also extended to kill him. A complaint in this regard was
submitted by the petitioner to the office of Superintendent of Police, Hansi,
Hisar vide Diary dated 10.10.2021 on which no action was taken. Yet another
complaint dated 13.10.2021 was also submitted to the office of Inspector
General of Police, Haryana vide diary dated 18.10.2021, which was forwarded
to the Superintendent of Police on 19.10.2021 and then to the Station House
Officer concerned on the same day for necessary action. However, as no action
was taken, hence, proceedings were initiated by means of instant petition and
for disregard to the directions given by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter
of 'Lalita Kumari Versus Government of U.P.' (supra).
A short reply by way of an affidavit of Safiuddin, HPS, Deputy
Superintendent of Police, Narnaund had been filed. The relevant extract of the
same reads thus:
"2. That the brief facts of the case are that complainant-
petitioner, Parkash son of Ghasi Ram resident of Thurana
submitted a complaint in the office of Superintendent of Police,
Hansi, which was sent to SHO Police Station Narnaund vide Diary
No. 902-PU dated 07.07.21, same was received in Police Station
Narnaund (Respondent No.5) SI Surender Kumar 1508/HSR verify
the facts of the complaint. During the verification statements of
complainant-petitioner and alleged persons (Sunil @ Sonu and his
father Balwan resident of Village Thurana, Tehsil Hansi) which
were named by complainant- petitioner were recorded individually
and found that complainant's-petitioner's son Ramu worked as a
labourer (farmworker) in the above said alleged persons field for
one year i.e. May, 2020 to April, 2021 in lieu of the fifth part of
total earning from the crop. In the month of April, 2021 both the
2 of 9
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:162783
CWP-9748-2022 -3- 2023:PHHC:162783
parties tally amount of their accounts and found that the petitioner
will pay Rs.87000/- to the alleged persons. After verification of
facts and preliminary investigation the matter was found to be
regarding money transactions and no caste abusing words were
used by anyone. After verification of the facts it was found that
allegations leveled by the complainant/petitioner were not correct.
On 11.08.2021 the said inquiry report was submitted before DSP,
Narnaund and the same was forwarded to Superintendent of
Police, Hansi and same was filed on 19.08.2021 attached herewith
as Annexure R-1.
3. That on 12.07.2021 the petitioner has moved another
complaint in the office of Labour Officer, Hisar regarding
recovery of above said amount from alleged persons namely Sunil
@ Sonu and his father Balwan resident of Village Thurana, Tehsil
Hansi Distt. Hisar. In this complaint complainant-petitioner has
neither mentioned the matter of labour amount nor about the
words related to any caste abusing. On dated 07.09.2021 land
owner Sunil @ sonu filed his reply in court/office of Labour
Officer. Both parties were present in the labour office but could
not settle the dispute. Labour officer, Hisar advised to
complainant/petitioner to file a case under proper authority before
competent court. A copy of the proceedings dated 07.09.2021,
14.09.2021 and 17.09.2021 passed by Labour Officer is attached
herewith as Annexure R-2.
4. That the complainant/petitioner has sent another application
by registered post in the office of the Inspector General of Police
Hisar Range, Hisar which was received vide Diary No. 6346 on
dated 13.04.22 and same was forwarded to the Superintendent of
Police Office Hansi. And same was received vide Diary No. 121-
PSPL-II dated 22.04.22. The claim/grievance in the above said
application was that FIR is lodged against the accused for abusing
caste based words and the wages amount of complainant-
3 of 9
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:162783
CWP-9748-2022 -4- 2023:PHHC:162783
petitioner be recovered. On said application FIR No. 283 dated
31.05.2022 at Police Station, Narnaund under sections 323/506/34
of IPC and under sections 3(1)(r)/3(1)(S)/33/89 of SC/ST Act was
registered against Sunil @Sonu and his father Balwan resident of
Village Thurana, Tehsil Hansi Distt. Hisar. That the prayer of the
complainant/petitioner has now become fructuous as the FIR No.
283 dated 31.05.2022 is already registered in Police Station
Narnaund.
5. That as per Rule no.7 of the Scheduled Castes and
Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Rules, 1995, A special
team headed by Saffiuddin HPS, DSP Sadar Hansi/deponent and
Respondent No.5 has been constituted for investigation of the
above case FIR No. 283 dated 31.05.2022 under section
323/506/34 of IPC & 3(R)(S) of SC/ST Act at Police Station,
Narnaund by the order of Respondent No.4 bearing no. 24011-14
dated 01.06.2022 and further given the directions to the SIT so
constituted, that it will carry out the investigation of the above said
case regularly on day-to-day basis. A copy of order dated
01.06.2022 is annexed herewith as Annexure R-3.
6. That on dated 02.06.2022 SIT and staff members visited the
place of occurrence Dharamsala/ Panchayat Ghar of Village
Thurana, on that time the following persons i.e. i) Parkash son of
Ghasi Ram, ii) Savitri wife of Parkash, iii) Jagbir son of Mangal
Ram, iv) Balbir son of Chandgi Ram, v) Surajmal (Ex. Sarpanch)
son of Teka vi) Sandeep son of Jaibir, vii) Kuldeep son of
Ramniwas, viii) Azad son of Hari Ram, ix) Satyawan son of Hawa
Singh, x) Mahabir son of Diwana all residents of Village Thurana
were present there. Petitioner said that it is the place where caste
abusing words were said by the alleged persons. Upon this SIT
deposed the fact of the case to persons present there to verify the
facts of F.I.R. A site plan of place of occurrence was also
prepared. After the investigation on that day complainant-
4 of 9
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:162783
CWP-9748-2022 -5- 2023:PHHC:162783
petitioner has been directed to produce his SC certificate and
alleged persons which were blamed by complainant-petitioner
were directed telephonically to come on 03.06.2022 before SIT in
his office.
7. That on dated 03.06.2022 following persons came to SIT
office namely i) Parkash son of Ghasi Ram, ii) Rammehar son of
Parkash, iii) Ramkishan son of Parkash, iv) Sonu son of Jaibir, v)
Ramdas son of Fateh Singh, vi) Balbir son of Chandgi Ram, vii)
Deepak son of Dilbagh, (Complainant-petitioner side) and i) Sunil
@ Sonu son of Balwan Singh, ii) Balwan son of Lakhi Ram, iii)
Chatar Singh son of Chandgi Ram, iv) Surat Singh son of Baje
Ram, v) Ramesh son of Lakhiram (Defendants side) all residents of
Village Thurana and deposed the facts of the case. SIT verified the
facts of case from the complainant/petitioner, alleged persons and
all other persons who were present there. SIT directed both the
parties to produce all the records regarding their land and crop
accounts before SIT on Monday i.e. 06.06.2022 and
complainant/petitioner, Prakash was directed to produce his
Scheduled Caste Certificate also.
8. That on dated 06.06.2022 following persons namely i)
Parkash son of Ghasi Ram, ii) Rammehar son of Parkash,
(Complainant-petitioner side) and i) Sunil @ Sonu son of Balwan
Singh, ii) Balwan son of Lakhi Ram, iii) Pawan Kumar son of
Chandgi Ram, iv) Surat Singh son of Baje Ram, v) Ramesh son of
Lakhiram all residents of Village Thurana came in the office of
SIT. Deposed the case facts to them and statements of all members
including present complainant/petitioner, alleged persons and
other persons present there have been recorded under section 161
of Criminal Procedure Code and also perused the documents
which were produced by the complainant/petitioner and alleged
persons regarding money transactions.
5 of 9
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:162783
CWP-9748-2022 -6- 2023:PHHC:162783
9. The SIT constituted has been provided with labour office
documents and SC certificates his also and the same was taken on
record through seizure memo. SIT has also recorded the statement
under section 161 of Cr.P.C. of complainant/petitioner and also
recorded the statement of HC Jitender No. 99/Hansi.
Complainant/petitioner Prakash was directed to also present the
names and numbers of land owners whose land was cultivated by
him. But complainant/petitioner has not come present with the
names and numbers of those land owners till now. So that the
allegations leveled by the petitioner could not classified. At per
facts/evidences which have come on file, it was found that
Rs.87000/- was the outstanding amount towards the
complainant/petitioner which was given to alleged persons and the
matter was found of only money transaction. The above said case
is still under investigation.
10. That, in this regard, it is most humbly stated before the
Hon'ble High Court that the complainant/petitioner is not entitled
to any relief because FIR has already been registered and no true
facts found as per the application version and the petition under
Article 226 of Constitution of India is liable to be outrightly
rejected being devoid of any merits therein.
11. That, on the other hand, the complainant/petitioner has filed
a petition for registration of FIR which has been already
registered and same is under investigation. It is therefore prayed
that strict action should be taken against the
complainant/petitioner because the complainant-petitioner is
wasting the valuable time of the Hon'ble court and impose heavy
cost against the complainant/petitioner."
Further, vide order dated 14.11.2021, the respondent-State was
also directed to file a report with regard to the compliance of the provisions of
Section 4 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
6 of 9
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:162783
CWP-9748-2022 -7- 2023:PHHC:162783
Atrocities) Act, 1989 and the reasons for delaying the completion of
investigation. In compliance thereto, status report by way of an affidavit of
Deputy Superintendent of Police, Narnaund dated 27.12.2022 has been filed,
which reads thus:
4. That after registration of case a Special investigation Team
was constituted in view of the provision contained in rule 7 of
SC/ST Act, 1989.
5. That the Special Investigation Team has conducted
investigation of this case. During course of investigation, the
special investigation team visited the place of occurrence Le.
Dharamshala of village Thurana on 2.6.2022 where the
respectable persons of the village Thurana including both the
parties were found present. The statements of witnesses have been
recorded. As per investigation and enquiry made from the
prominent persons of village Thurana who were present at that
time in Dharamshala/Panchayat Ghar Thurana and found that
Sunil and Balwan did not give any abuse pertaining to caste and
creed and the allegations of SC/ST could not be proved. Thereafter
both parties along with respectable persons of the village visited
the office of SIT and record pertaining to land cultivated by the son
of the petitioner, to sale of crops, share of both the parties were
taken in to police possession. Caste Certificate of the petitioner
was also taken in to police possession. Thereafter on 3.6.2022 and
6.6.2022 both the parties alongwith prominent persons of village
Thurana visited the office of Special Investigation Team and
record pertaining to 32 acres of crops of the year 2019-2020 was
scrutinized and on scrutiny of record, it has transpired that the
total share of son of the petitioner was Rs. 2,63,811/- whereas
amount of Rs.3,51,563/- has already been paid to the son of the
petitioner by Sunil and Balwan, as such the petitioner himself has
to return Rs. 87552/- to Sunil and Balwan, the alleged accused.
Statements of Suresh Kumar son of Dhoop Singh, Dilbag son of
7 of 9
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:162783
CWP-9748-2022 -8- 2023:PHHC:162783
Ved Parkash both residents of village Thurana was also recorded
in which they have also stated that the scrutiny of record of the
year 2019-2020 was conducted in their presence and as per
record, total share of profit of Ramu son of Parkash petitioner was
come to Rs.2.63,811/- and he has already been paid Rs.3,51,563/-,
as such an amount of Rs.87552/- in excess was paid to the Ramu
son of the petitioner, hence allegations of not giving money to
Ramu son of Parkash petitioner have not been proved.
6. XXXXXXXXXXXX
7. That with regard to appearance of the petitioner before
investigating agency, it is submitted that the petitioner did not
appear before the SIT on or after 21.11.2022 as directed by this
Hon'ble High Court. The petitioner has claimed that he has
cultivated 37 acres of land but he has provided record of only 32
acres. The petitioner has not provided record of remaining 05
acres of land till today. The petitioner was issued notice on dated
6.6.2022 and 18.7.2022 but the petitioner refused to receive the
notice.
8. That during course of investigation, no evidence regarding
caste abuse or giving money by Sunil and Balwan to the petitioner
came on file, rather a sum of Rs.87552/- is due towards the
petitioner and as such a cancellation report has been prepared in
this case on 08.12.2022.
9. XXXXXXXXXXXX
10. That with regard to delay in completion of the investigation,
it is submitted that the investigation of this case has been
completed in a fair and impartial manner and none has displayed
negligence in the investigation of this case and as such no action is
required to be initiated against any of the employee under section
4 of SC/ST Act. The earlier application/complaint dated 7.7.2021
of the petitioner was on enquired and finalized on 7.8.202, as
referred above and the petitioner has not provided the record of
8 of 9
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:162783
CWP-9748-2022 -9- 2023:PHHC:162783
remaining 5 of land and also refused to take the notice. The
allegations leveled in this case have not been proved, so a
cancellation report/report under section 173 Cr.P.C. has been
prepared in this case on 08.12.2022. The petition of the petitioner
deserves to be dismissed being devoid of merit.
Even though aforesaid status report had been filed in December,
2022 and reply by way of an affidavit had been filed by the respondent-State in
October, 2022, however, no replication/rejoinder has been filed controverting
the same. It is evident from a perusal of the statement filed by the respondent-
State that the FIR into the incident was registered and investigation and the
offences, as alleged, were found to have not been committed. It is informed by
the learned State Counsel on instructions from ASI Munish Kumar, P.S.
Narnaund that the police is recommending filing of a cancellation report in the
said matter.
Since the prayer in the present petition was to direct the
respondents to register an FIR and to conduct an investigation into the same, the
needful having been done, there is no necessity of passing any further order in
the present case.
The present petition is accordingly disposed of as having been
rendered infructuous.
Liberty is, however, granted to the petitioner to pursue his
alternative remedies in accordance with law.
(VINOD S. BHARDWAJ)
DECEMBER 13, 2023 JUDGE
rajender
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:162783
9 of 9
