Crl.Misc. No.M-7613 of 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Decided on: September 24, 2010. Crl.Misc. No.M-7613 of 2010 . Rajni Devi. .. Petitioner VERSUS The State of Punjab and others. . Respondents *** CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.S.BEDI PRESENT Mr.R.K.Arya, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.P.S.Bajwa, DAG., Punjab. *** M.M.S. BEDI, J. (ORAL) Petitioner claiming herself to be a victim of the atrocities and sexual assault of respondent Nos.5 to 11, seeks a direction to respondent Nos.1 to 4, invoking the inherent jurisdiction of this Court, to entrust the enquiry to an independent agency and quash the cancellation report dated 30.01.2010 in FIR No.53 dated 01.06.2009, registered at Police Station Kalanaur, under Sections . . . 1 Crl.Misc. No.M-7613 of 2010 376, 511, 436, 427, 342, 354, 452, 323, 148 & 149 IPC and under Sections 3 & 4 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, It is alleged by the petitioner that respondent Nos.5 to 11 along with three other persons namely Balraj Singh, Rachhpal Singh and Jatinderpal Singh, in connivance with each other had illegally trespassed into the house of the petitioner and her brother- in-law and set the house of the petitioner on fire, gave beatings to the petitioner and sexually assaulted her. Counsel for the petitioner informs that the cancellation report is still pending before the Illaqua Magistrate and that the petitioner intends to contest the same by filing a protest petition. In the reply filed, it has been submitted that challan has already been presented on30.01.2010 keeping respondent Nos.5 to 11 in column No.2 of the challan as they were found innocent during enquiry. It will not be appropriate at this stage, in exercise of powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., to express any opinion regarding the allegations levelled by the petitioner as she has got an alternative remedy to contest the cancellation report by presenting protest petition. Since the claims of respondent Nos.5 to 11, have been kept in column No.2, the petitioner has got another alternative remedy to depose truth in the Court on Oath and seek the relief as per the provisions of Section 319 Cr.P.C. She has also got another remedy available to her to file a complaint in case it is felt . . . 2 Crl.Misc. No.M-7613 of 2010 that the enquiry is not being conducted in an unbiased manner. Counsel for the petitioner has contended that respondent Nos.5 to 11 are proclaimed offender but in order to favour them, they have been found innocent. There is no material before this Court to arrive at a conclusion that respondent Nos.5 to 11, are proclaimed offender in the present case despite having been declared as innocent. In case at any stage, there is material against them, it will be open to the Court to summon them under Section 319 Cr.P.C. and proceed against them after securing their presence in accordance with law. No ground is made out for the exercise of inherent jurisdiction in the circumstances mentioned hereinabove. Disposed of. (M.M.S.BEDI) JUDGE September 24, 2010. rka . . . 3