Sanstosh Kumari vs State Of Punjab And Ors
2023 Latest Caselaw 1202 P&H

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                      AT CHANDIGARH
                                                   LPA-930-2022
                                     Date of Decision: 19.01.2023

Santosh Kumari                                                 .....Appellant(s)
                                          Versus
State of Punjab and others                                    ....Respondent(s)

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SANDHAWALIA
       HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HARPREET KAUR JEEWAN

Present:     Mr. Baltej Singh Sidhu, Sr. Advocate,
             with Mr. Chandan Singh, Advocate,
             and Mr. K.S. Brar, Advocate,
             for the appellant.

G.S.SANDHAWALIA, J.

The present appeal has been filed against the order passed by the

learned Single Judge in CWP No. 23220 of 2021 on 18.08.2022. Vide the

judgment, the writ petition was partly allowed which was filed by the

appellant herself to the extent that a new Special Investigating Team (SIT)

was constituted to be headed by the Additional Director General of Police i.e.

not less than the rank of the Additional Deputy General of Police and

Constituent Members of the SIT were not to be lower than the rank of Senior

Superintendent of Police. The said SIT was to take over the investigation

from the SIT headed by Sh. Kesar Singh, PPS, SP(PBI), Patiala and the report

was to be submitted to the concerned Court at the earliest.

The relief which had been sought in the writ petition was to get

the further investigation in FIR No. 101 dated 22.06.2019 under Sections 302,

120-B, 34 IPC and Section 52-A of Prisons Act registered at P.S. Nabha to be

conducted by the CBI or any other independent agency as the State Police has

arbitrarily and illegally not investigated the conspiracy part of the case in

question. The case was pertaining to the death of Mohinder Pal @ Bittu,

husband of the appellant, who is stated to have died in judicial custody while

lodged in New District Jail, Nabha.

1 of 3

A perusal of the order of the learned Single Judge would go on to

show that he has referred extensively to the diary notes of the deceased in

which allegations were made against the police official. It was also noticed

that there was earlier litigation and a finding was recorded that the

composition of SIT was of PPS Officers and one Sub Inspector who were

lower in rank than the persons against whom the allegations were made in the

diary. It also transpires that the torture of the deceased as such was to get a

confession regarding the matters in sacrilege cases. In sacrilege cases, the

investigation was taken from CBI and was entrusted to SIT. Challenge had

been raised and this Court had endorsed the matter to be investigated by the

SIT as against the closure report given by the CBI. It is, thus, apparent that

the learned Single Judge has also given the alternative relief as such which

was prayed for by the writ petitioner and the discretion which has been

exercised by the learned Single Judge while constituting the SIT, in our

considered opinion, has been justifiably exercised. Therefore, no reasonable

ground as such would also be there on merits that the investigation as such

should only be conducted by the CBI. We had put the query to the senior

counsel as to how the present appeal would be maintainable in view of the

judgment of the Apex Court in Ram Kishan Fauji vs. State of Haryana and

others, 2017 AIR (SC) 1535.

Senior counsel has been fair enough to point out that there are

two judgments of the Division Bench which have also dismissed the letters

patent appeals on the ground of maintainability while referring to the

judgments in Jalaluddin vs. State of Haryana and others, 2018 (2) PLR 168

and LPA No. 329 of 2019, Charanjit Singh and another vs. State of Punjab

and others decided on 25.02.2020. He, however, points out that the SLP is

2 of 3

stated to be pending in Jalaluddin's case (supra). Heavy reliance as such has

been placed upon the judgment of the Calcutta High Court in The Director

General of Police (W.B.) and others vs. Gopal Kumar Agarwal and

another, 2020 (3) Cal. L.T. 158 to submit that both the above said judgments

were distinguished as such by the Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court

which has proceeded as such to hold that the appeals were maintainable on

the ground that no point of criminal law was decided by the learned Single

Judge. Thus, we are of the view that in view of the said co-ordinate Bench

judgments, there is no need to take a divergent view.

In such circumstances, we are of the considered opinion that the

discretion which has been exercised by the learned Single Judge is not liable

to be interfered with as the writ petition has been partly allowed and the

complainant as such had herself asked that the investigation in the alternative

be done by an independent agency. The learned Single Judge has been

graceful enough to constitute the SIT in the manner in which high rank police

officials of the rank of the Additional Deputy General of Police and the

Senior Superintendent of Police have been made members and, therefore,

there can be no such apprehension that the same would favour the accused in

any manner.

Resultantly, we are of the considered opinion that the order as

such does not call for any interference in the present appeal and the same

stands dismissed in limine.

                                                    (G.S. SANDHAWALIA)
                                                            JUDGE


19.01.2023                                     (HARPREET KAUR JEEWAN)
shivani                                                  JUDGE
Whether reasoned/speaking                       Yes
Whether reportable                              No
                                  3 of 3