Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

JAGDISH LAL versus SHRI ISHWAR SINGH, SSP, JALANDHAR

High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Jagdish Lal v. Shri Ishwar Singh, SSP, Jalandhar - COCP-1338-2006 [2006] RD-P&H 8676 (16 October 2006)

COCP No.1338 of 2006 -: 1 :-

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

COCP No.1338 of 2006

Date of decision: October 09, 2006.

Jagdish Lal

...Petitioner(s)

v.

Shri Ishwar Singh, SSP, Jalandhar

...Respondent(s)

Present: Shri R.S. Bajaj, Advocate for the petitioner.

Surya Kant, J. (Oral)

The petitioner filed Crl. Misc. No.49150-M of 2006 alleging therein that despite the commission of an offence under the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, no FIR was being registered in the matter though he had also served a legal notice in that regard. The said petition was disposed of with a direction to the Senior Superintendent of Police, Jalandhar to conduct an inquiry into the allegations made by the petitioner and in case commission of cognizable offence was found, to issue necessary directions for registration of the FIR.

Alleging non-compliance of the aforesaid order, this contempt petition has been filed.

In para 9 of the contempt petition, the petitioner has averred that in compliance to the above mentioned order dated August 22, 2006 passed by this Court, an inquiry was entrusted to Shri Dilbagh Singh, DSP, Shahkot, District Jalandhar who also recorded statement of the petitioner.

COCP No.1338 of 2006 -: 2 :-

However, according to the petitioner, he wanted to produce some more witnesses before the DSP but their statements were allegedly not recorded.

From the averments made by the petitioner himself, it is apparent that some inquiry has been conducted by a competent police officer, though the conclusion of the said inquiry might not be to the satisfaction of the petitioner.

In this view of the matter, it is difficult to hold that there is any disobedience to the directions as contained in the order dated August 22, 2006 passed by this Court, much less a willful or deliberate non-compliance thereof.

Consequently, this petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to approach the Senior Superintendent of Police, Jalandhar who may inform the petitioner about the final outcome of the inquiry, preferably in writing.

October 09, 2006. [ Surya Kant ]

kadyan Judge


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.