Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2001 DIGILAW 1321 (PNJ)

Jaspal Singh v. State Of Punjab

2001-11-27

V.M.JAIN

body2001
Judgment V.M.Jain, J. 1. This is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. filed by the petitioners, seeking transfer of the investigation in FIR No. 28 dated 24.12.1997 under Sections 364/498-A, IPC registered in PS Sangat, District Bathinda to the CBI, as the case pertains to the disappearance of Balbir Kaur, daughter of petitioner No. 1, who had disappeared in mysterious circumstances, shortly after marriage. 2. In the petition it was alleged that Balbir Kaur, daughter of petitioner No. 1, was married to Jagtar Singh, respondent No. 5 on 11.10.1997 and she was aged 22 years at that time and that sufficient amount was spent on the said marriage. It was alleged that shortly after marriage, her in-laws started harassing her for bringing more dowry and she was subjected to humiliation by her in-laws and that after one month of her marriage, she contacted petitioner No. 1 and told him that she may be sent to a far off place or may even be killed. It was alleged that subsequently Balbir Kaur telephoned in the neighborhood of petitioner No. 1 and left message that someone should talk to her, whereupon Avtar Singh talked to her on telephone from his village, at the house of her in-laws and at that time she told him that she was harassed by Jagtar Singh and other members of the family and she asked him that she should be taken home from there immediately. It was alleged that thereupon Smt. Balbir Kaur was brought from Village Pathrala and at that time, petitioner No. 1 was told that her in-laws were demanding Rs. 1 lac. It was further alleged that on 15.12.1997, respondent No. 5 came to Village Sanghera and wanted to take back Balbir Kaur with him to Village Pathrala Kalan and he took her with him on 15.12.1997. It was alleged that on 20.12.1997, Balbir Kaur, Nasib Kaur and Jagtar Singh went to Rama Mandi from where they took Paramjit Kaur to Village Ram Tirth and in front of the entire family, Nasib Kaur disclosed that Jagtar Singh wanted to take Balbir Kaur to Delhi and she expressed her apprehension that something wrong any not occur at Delhi. It was alleged that on 20.12.1997, Balbir Kaur, Nasib Kaur and Jagtar Singh went to Rama Mandi from where they took Paramjit Kaur to Village Ram Tirth and in front of the entire family, Nasib Kaur disclosed that Jagtar Singh wanted to take Balbir Kaur to Delhi and she expressed her apprehension that something wrong any not occur at Delhi. It was alleged that on 22.12.1997, Gurmit Singh came and told petitioner No. 1 that his daughter had come back to the village, whereupon on 23.12.1997 petitioner No. 1 alongwith Kirpal Singh went to Village Pathrala Kalan to inquire about the well being of his daughter Balbir Kaur and met Nasib Kaur (mother-in-law), who told him that Balbir Kaur had left for Village Sanghera on the evening of 21.12.1997, whereupon he contacted his family members but the whereabouts of Balbir Kaur were not known. It was alleged that thereupon petitioner No. 1 alongwith Kirpal Singh went to PS Sangat and they lodged aforesaid FIR No. 23 dated 24.12.1997 under Sections 364/498-A, 34 IPC, copy Annexure P1. It was alleged that uptil now the challan had not been presented in the aforesaid FIR and all the accused had been given the concession of bail. It was alleged that considering the facts of the case, investigation of the case should be handed over to CBI, considering that it was a case of disappearance of Smt. Balbir Kaur within 2 months of her marriage. 3. In the written reply dated 17.5.1999 filed by Harnek Singh Sran, SSP Bathinda, it was alleged that the FIR was still under investigation. It was alleged that investigation of the case was conducted by the then SI Dinesh Kumar, SHO; Brij Mohan Sarup, DSP (D) Bathinda and Shri Jaspreet Singh Sidhu, DSP (R) Bathinda and now the case was being investigated by Shri Mukhtiar Singh, SP (Head Quarters) Mansa. It was alleged that during investigation accused Nasib Kaur was arrested on 8.1.1998 while accused Jagtar Singh and Sukhdev Singh were arrested on 23.1.1998 and that they were released on bail on 3.2.1998 and 4.3.1998. It was alleged that various officers had investigated the case thoroughly and had taken all possible steps to trace the lady. It was further alleged that photographs of Balbir Kaur were also got published in the various newspapers on various dates that Smt. Balbir Kaur was missing. 4. It was alleged that various officers had investigated the case thoroughly and had taken all possible steps to trace the lady. It was further alleged that photographs of Balbir Kaur were also got published in the various newspapers on various dates that Smt. Balbir Kaur was missing. 4. On the last date of hearing i.e. 30.10.2001, considering that the reply filed by the Shri Harnek Singh Sran, SSP, Bhatinda was filed more than 2 years back and neither side was aware about the latest position, it was directed that the State shall file status report and that the I.O. alongwith Police file shall be present in court. In pursuance of these directions, SI Manjit Singh, SHO came present alongwith police file. Status report was also filed by Shri Bhupinder Singh DSP (R), Bathinda. 5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record carefully. 6. As per the status report dated 13.11.2001, the preliminary investigation of the case was conducted by SI Dinesh Kumar, SHO from 24.12.1997 to 26.3.1998 and during investigation of the case, Jagtar Singh, Sukhdev Singh and Nasib Kaur were arrested as accused persons. They were now on bail. It was alleged that investigation of the case was conducted by Shri Brij Mohan Sarup DSP (D) from 26.3.1998 to 28.4.1998, who had joined the mediator in the investigation but no clue could be found. It was alleged that as per the directions of the DSP, Police notices were issued on 14.1.1998, 25.4.1998 and 27.4.1998 in various newspapers. It was further alleged that further investigation was conducted by Jaspreet Singh Sidhu, DSP (R) and photographs were flashed on television. It was alleged that further investigation was conducted by Shri Mukhtiar Singh Dahiya, SP (H) Mansa, as per directions of DIG Faridkot. It was alleged that thereafter investigation was conducted by Shri Makhan Singh, DSP (D) Mansa from 22.6.1999 to 2.8.1999. It was further alleged that again SP (H) Mansa conducted the investigation from 4.8.1999 to 21.10.1999 and found the case to be untraced, whereupon SI Manjit Singh, SHO, prepared untracked report on 6.11.1999 and sent the same to the higher authorities and that on 1.3.2000 the application was presented in the court for discharge of the accused and that on 15.10.2001, the Judicial Magistrate had dismissed the application for discharge of the accused. Copy of the order dated 15.10.2001 passed by the Judicial Magistrate was also attached with the status report. 7. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record carefully. 8. As per allegations of the petitioners, Smt. Balbir Kaur was married on 11.10.1997 and that she is missing from the house of her in-laws since 21.12.1997 i.e. less than 2 months after her marriage. Local police has failed to trace the girl and even though almost 4 years have elapsed when the FIR was registered on 24.12.1997, local police had in fact submitted untraced report in this case, though the petitioner in the FIR had levelled serious allegations about the demand of dowry and the harassment of his daughter Smt. Balbir Kaur by her in-laws on that account. 9. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the present case, especially when a young girl had disappeared less than 2 months after her marriage and for almost 4 years her whereabouts are not known and the local police had submitted untraced report, in my opinion, it would be a fit case wherein the investigation of this case should be transferred from the local police to CBI, so that the case is thoroughly investigated and the whereabouts of the young lady are known and the culprits are brought to book. 10. For the reasons recorded above, present petition is allowed and the investigation of this case is transferred the CBI. The S.P. CBI, Chandigarh shall depute an experienced police officer to investigate this case thoroughly, who shall make all efforts to trace the girl and to bring the culprits to book. The S.S.P. Bathinda is directed to handover all the relevant papers of this case to S.S.P., CBI, Chandigarh for further necessary action. It is further directed that considering that the matter is almost 4 years old the CBI shall conclude the investigation within 3 months of the date of receipt of papers from the S.S.P. Bathinda. Copies of this order be sent to S.S.P. Bathinda, and S.P., CBI, Chandigarh, for strict compliance.