Vinay Kumar Bajaj and Others Vs State of Punjab & Others

Through the instant petition , cast under Article 226 of t he Constitutio n of India, a prayer is made f or issuance of a mandamus, for transferring and to entrust the investigation in case FIR No.02 (Annexure P-2) dated 01.01.2018, under Sections 307, 323, 324, 452, 148 and 149 of the I P C, 1860, regis t ered at Police Station Guru H a r Sahai, District Ferozepur, to an independen t agency like Central Bureau of Investigation, except the Pun j ab Police.

¶13

Learned counsel for the petit i oners submits that in the instant case, there w as a brutal attack by the henc h men of the son of the then sitt i ng MLA, ther e fore, the investigation has been conducted in an impartial man n er, rather the i n vestigation has not been cond u cted in such a manner, so that t he main culpri t can be saved.

¶14

This Court, vide order dated 12.03.2025, had passed t he MANPREET SINGH 2025.04.01 11:57I attest to the accuracy andhereinafter e xtracted order upon the instant p etition :- authenticity of this order/judgment

¶15

CWP-2704-2018 (O&M)

¶16

2

¶17

“This Court vide ord e r dated 09.01.2025, passed the hereinafter extracted or d er:“1. In deference to the directions issued by this Court on 07.01.2025, Mr. Ranjit Singh Dhillon, IPS, Head of t he S.I.T. concerned, has r e corded his personal appeara n ce before this Court. He h a s informed this Court that, furt h er investigation in the present FIR is underway and it will be concluded within two m o nths positively.

¶18

2. List on 27.03.2025.

¶19

3. On the subsequent d a te of hearing, a status report w ith regard to investigation b e filed before this Court. 4. The personal appear a nce of the officer is exempted till further orders.”

¶20

The applicants/petitio n ers have moved the inst a nt applications citing app r ehension, that since the previ o us head of the SIT, has s u perannuated on 31.01.2025, a nd now a new SIT which h as been constituted, consistin g of the same very officer, who was the SSP, Ferozepur on 26.12.2017, at the time w hen the incident in question t o ok place. Therefore, they have apprehension that now the investigation which was heading in a right direction, m ay derail.

¶21

Though this Court, a t this stage, is not making a ny observations with rega r d to the apprehension raised by applicants/ petitioners, h owever, to maintain the faith a nd transparency of an i n dividual into the investigat i on process, it directed to th e learned State counsel to have a pt instructions from the D i rector, Bureau of Investigatio n to constitute an SIT of so m e senior and responsible offi c er, preferably officer(s) pos t ed outside the District Ferozep u r. Adjourned to 27.03.20 2 5, the date already fixed in t he main case.”

¶22

In deference to the directions (supra), passed by this Court, t he MANPREET SINGH Director, B u reau of Investigation, vide order dated 20.03.2025, has constitu t ed 2025.04.01 11:57 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

¶23

3

¶24

CWP-2704-2018 (O&M) SIT of following members :-

¶25

1.	M r. P.K. Sinah, IPS, ADGP/NRI SAS Nagar , Punjab,	Chairman
2.	M r. Swapan Sharma, IPS, DIG,F Range Ferozepur erozepur,	Member
3.	M r. Ajay Raj Singh, PPS, SPD,T (answering deponent) aran Tarn	Member

¶26

Since the SIT of ADGP has b een constituted, therefore, at t his stage, this C ourt is of the considered view t hat no further direction is requi r ed to be pass e d in the instant lis. Consequ e ntly, the instant writ petition is disposed of , with a mandamus upon the SIT concerned, to conclude t he investigatio n , within a period of four m o nths from the date of receipt of certified co p y of this order/judgment, as t h e FIR, in question, was registe r ed way back o n dated 30.12.2018.

¶27

It is expected that the SIT concerned, as constituted by t he Director, B u reau of Investigation, shall fil e its final report within the ab o ve time frame, before the learned Illaqa Magis t rate concerned.

¶28

In case, the petitioners fetch any grievance with regard to t he final report, which would be submitted b y the SIT concerned, before t he learned Illaqa Magistrate, they would be a t liberty to approach the lear n ed Magistrate c oncerned by filing apt motion.

¶29

Pending applications, if any, st a nd disposed of accordingly.

¶30

(KULDEEP TIWARI) JUDGE March 27, 2 025 Manpreet MANPREET SINGH Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No 2025.04.01 11:57 I attest to the accuracy andauthenticity of this Whether reportable : Yes/No order/judgment

Vinay Kumar Bajaj and Others v. State of Punjab & Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vinay Kumar Bajaj and Others v. State of Punjab & Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pranjal Kumar Vs State of Haryana and Other

M/S Kulwinder Singh and Company Vs State of Punjab and Others

The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs M/S Bindal Associates and Others

Sukhdev Singh Vs State of Punjab and Others

Kuldip Kaur Vs State of Punjab and Others

Mikado Realtors Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of Haryana and Others