The petitioner sought protection under Section 482 CrPC alleging infringement of life and liberty due to false implication and misuse of power by police, citing a dowry-related application filed before the Women Cell in the wrong jurisdiction. The Court found the petition infructuous.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Crl. Misc. No. M-25704 of 2010 Date of decision:- 19.11.2010
Baldev Singh and others
... Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and others
... Respondents
CORAM:- HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA
Present:Mr. R.K. Kapila, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr. Amandeep Singh Rai, AAG, Punjab.
SABINA, J
The petitioner has filed this petition under Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure praying for issuance of directions to respondents No. 1 and 2 to protect the life and liberty of the petitioners, which is being infringed by the respondent No. 4, who is misusing his powers for extraneous considerations at the behest of respondent No. 6 and further for protection from false implication at the hands of respondent No. 6.
Learned State counsel has filed reply on behalf of the respondents No. 1 to 5 wherein it has been stated that respondent No. 6 had filed an application before Women Cell. A detailed inquiry was conducted by Surinder Singh, Sub Inspector, CAW&C Cell, Ludhiana and it was found that Paramjit Kaur was married with Parveen Kumar as per Sikh rites on 29.1.2006 at Mehak Palace, Raikot. The allegations levelled qua dowry articles given by the applicant at the time of marriage falls under the
-2-
Crl. Misc. No. 25704 of 2010
jurisdiction of Police District, Jagraon whereas applicant-Paramjeet Kaur was resident of Barnala and the family members of her in-laws were resident of Chandigarh. Hence, Ludhiana Police could not take any action in the matter. The application moved by respondent No.
6 has since been filed and consigned to the record room.
In these circumstances, the present petition has been rendered infructuous and the same is dismissed as such.
(SABINA) November 19, 2010 JUDGE shabha
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a writ petition under Section 482 CrPC for protection of life and liberty should be allowed
Whether the allegation of dowry harassment falls under the jurisdiction of Ludhiana Police in circumstances of residence
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Baldev Singh and others
State of Punjab
SABINA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
