Dismissed

Yashpal v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC6 Sept 2011CRWP/1694/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal writ petition challenging illegal detention, the High Court examined the report of a court-appointed Warrant Officer who could not locate the alleged detenu at two police stations. The Court found the detenu was lawfully in judicial custody in a different district. The petition was dismissed with liberty to seek other remedies.

What the court decided

AI extract

Yashpal Vs State of Haryana… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Punjab & Haryana HC (2011)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

Criminal Writ Petition 1694 of 2011 Date of Decision : September 06, 2011

Yashpal

....Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana and others

¶7

.....Respondents

¶8

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.P.S. MANN

¶9

Present: Mr. R.S.Mamli, Advocate

¶10

Mr. Sunil Katyal, Sr. Deputy Advocate General, Haryana

¶11

T.P.S. MANN, J.(Oral)

¶12

According to the petitioner, his brother-in-law Pardeep Thakur was picked up by 18/20 persons including the police officials of Police Station Farakpur on 29.8.2011 at 3.00 p.m. from his house and ever since then kept in illegal detention. Neither any criminal case stood registered against him nor he was produced before the Ilaqa Magistrate.

¶13

While issuing notice of motion for today, the Court had appointed a Warrant Officer to search for Pardeep Thakur, the alleged detenu.

¶14

-2-

¶15

Crl. Writ Petition 1694 of 2011

¶16

The Warrant Officer has submitted his report. He has mentioned therein that on 30.8.2011 in the evening time he, alongwith the petitioner, went to Police Station CIA Staff, Tehsil Jagadhri, District Yamuna Nagar. The main gate was opened by Constable Labh Singh No. 907, who feigned ignorance about any such person by the name of Pardeep Thakur in police custody. The Warrant Officer also searched the premises of the Police Station but did not find Pardeep Thakur there. Even SI Ran Singh, who reached there, in the meantime, denied keeping any such person by the name of Pardeep Thakur in custody. The Warrant Officer then reached Police Station Farakpur where he met Head Constable Pawan Kumar, No. 276. Said Head Constable Pawan Kumar, on being asked, denied that any such person by the name of Pardeep Thakur had been detained there. Even the search of the Police Station proved to be futile as the alleged detenu was not found. When SI Rajiv, SHO, Police Station Farakpur reached there, he also denied having Pardeep Thakur in his custody.

¶17

Reply has been filed by respondent No.3-Rajiv SI/SHO, Police Station Farakpur, Yamuna Nagar, wherein it has been stated that on 30.8.2011 the Warrant Officer appointed by this Court had conducted a raid at Police Station Farakpur, but did not find Pardeep Thakur in the premises of the Police Station. It has also been stated that Pardeep Thakur was not arrested by the local police nor he was wanted in any criminal case pertaining to Police Station Farakpur. It has also been

¶18

Crl. Writ Petition 1694 of 2011

¶19

-3-

¶20

mentioned in the reply that on 31.8.2011, the petitioner had submitted an application by alleging therein that on 29.8.2011 when he went to meet his brother-in-law Pardeep Thakur at his house situated at Tara Puri Colony/Vishnu Nagar, Yamuna Nagar, 18/20 persons forcibly entered his house by jumping over the boundary wall and caught hold of Pardeep Thakur from his arms besides asking him to accompany them. Some of them were in police uniform. Some were having weapons with them. The petitioner had asked them the reason as to why they had apprehended Pardeep Thakur but they did not give any reply. The petitioner, accordingly, prayed for taking legal action against the aforesaid unknown persons. On the basis of the application submitted by the petitioner, case FIR No. 274 dated 31.8.2011, under Sections 365/452/34 IPC had been registered at Police Station Farakpur. During investigation of the said case, it came to light that Pardeep Thakur was involved in many criminal cases. He was also history sheeter No. 121/A of Police Station Charthawal, District Mujafarnagar (U.P). A long list of 23 cases has been given in para 4 of the reply in which said Pardeep Thakur had been involved in the past. Presently, he was in judicial custody and confined in jail after having been arrested and produced before the Ilaqa Magistrate by the District Police, Panipat in connection with FIR No. 393 dated 7.5.2011, under Section 379 IPC and Section 41 (1) Cr.P.C., registered at Police Station Chandni Bagh, Panipat. Alongwith the reply, copy of the order dated 3.9.2011 passed by the

¶21

-4-

¶22

Crl. Writ Petition 1694 of 2011

¶23

Court of Judicial Magistrate 1^st Class, Panipat has been appended as Annexure R-3.

¶24

After obtaining instructions, learned State counsel has apprised the Court that FIR No. 393 dated 7.5.2011, under Section 379 IPC was registered at Police Station Chandni Bagh, District Panipat, on the basis of an application submitted by one Anil Garg son of Rameshwar Dass Garg, resident of House No. 767, Sector 11, Panipat. In the said FIR, Anil Garg had stated that on 5.5.2011 at 8.00 p.m. he went to Vegetable Mandi, Sanauli Road on motor cycle No. HR-06-R8730 for purchasing vegetables. After parking the same, he went to buy the vegetables. On his return, he did not find his motor cycle. It has also been stated that on 2.9.2011, SI Raj Singh of Auto Vehicle Theft Cell (AVT Cell), Panipat, who was entrusted with the investigation of the case FIR No. 393 of 2011 arrested aforementioned Pardeep Thakur and two others, namely, Satender Malik son of Harbir Singh and Ram Kumar son of Om Parkash in the said case. After bringing them to Police Station Chandni Bagh, Panipat and making an entry vide DDR No. 21 dated 2.9.2011 at 3.00 p.m. in respect of the arrest of Pardeep Thakur and others, he proceeded to the AVT Cell, Panipat by taking Pardeep Thakur and two others with him. Learned State counsel has also drawn the attention of the Court to the order dated 3.9.2011 passed by the Judicial Magistrate 1^st Class, Panipat when Pardeep Thakur and two others were produced in custody with muffled faces and the police

¶25

-5-

¶26

Crl. Writ Petition 1694 of 2011

¶27

prayed for remanding them to judicial custody. The Judicial Magistrate 1^st Class, Panipat accepted the prayer and directed that pending investigation, they be remanded to judicial custody till 17.9.2011.

¶28

In view of the above, it is clear that Pardeep Thakur, the alleged detenu, is presently in judicial custody, having been arrested on 2.9.2011 by the police of Police Station Chandni Bagh, Panipat in case FIR No. 393 dated 7.5.2011. The plea of the petitioner that Pardeep Thakur had been kept in illegal detention at Police Station Farakpur or Police Station CIA Staff, Tehsil Jagadhri, District Yamuna Nagar have been found to be false as the Warrant Officer did not find him at any of those two places.

¶29

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that after having been picked up from his house on 29.8.2011 at 3.00 p.m., Pardeep Thakur was taken to Panipat, where he was falsely involved in FIR No. 393 dated 7.5.2011.

¶30

Be that as it may, Pardeep Thakur is presently in legal custody. Therefore, no relief can be granted to the petitioner. The petition is, accordingly, dismissed.

¶31

However, the petitioner would be at liberty to avail of any other remedy available to him under the law.

¶32

Crl. Writ Petition 1694 of 2011 -6-

¶33

( T.P.S.MANN ) September 06, 2011 JUDGE ajay-1

Yashpal v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Yashpal v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jagtar Singh Vs Jagdev Singh

Kulwinder Kaur Vs Savinder Kaur and Ors.

Bhupinder Handa Vs Sushma

Mahender Kumar Vs Dwarka Prasad

Jarnail Singh Vs Bachan Singh and Ors.

Mangal Rai Vs Jai Bhagwan and Ors.