CRWP No. 1382 of 2009 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRWP No. 1382 of 2009 Date of decision: 18.03.2011 Preeto Rani ........ Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others ........ Respondents **** CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JORA SINGH PRESENT: Mr. G.S. Sandhu, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. P.S. Sidhu, Additional Advocate General, Punjab. Mr. Ajay Kumar Sharma, Advocate, for respondents No. 4 to 9. **** JORA SINGH, J. Preeto Rani, preferred this writ petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of a writ in the nature of Habeas Corpus, for the release of detenue namely Jaswinder Kaur, daughter of the petitioner from the illegal custody of respondents No. 4 to 9. Allegation of the petitioner is that detenue is her daughter and was married with respondent No.4 i.e. Balvir Singh, about 8 years back. Out of this wedlock she has one female child aged about 6 years. CRWP No. 1382 of 2009 -2- Jaswinder Kaur, was being harassed by respondents No. 4 to 9 on account of dowry. At one time she was thrown out from her matrimonial home. Later on there was a compromise. In view of the compromise Jaswinder Kaur, was sent to her matrimonial home. Respondent No.4- Balvir Singh, sworn an affidavit that in future he will not harass the daughter of the petitioner for want of dowry but after affidavit, in the first week of May, 2009, Jaswinder Kaur, all of a sudden went missing from her matrimonial house. Minor daughter of the detenue was also sent to the house of the petitioner. Daughter of the detenue told her that detenue was badly beaten by respondents No. 4 to 9. Blood was oozing out of her head. After that she (minor daughter) was taken to another room and made her to sleep. Petitioner is apprehending that detenue was murdered by respondents No. 4 to 9. Representation was given to the police but no action. In pursuance of the notice, reply was filed by respondents No.1 to 3 in the shape of affidavit of Tarun Rattan, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sub Division, Abohar, District Ferozepur, to the effect that respondents No. 4 to 9 have levelled counter allegations against the petitioner regarding missing of Jaswinder Kaur. Both the parties have submitted complaints to the police against each other. FIR No. 22 dated 25.1.2010, under Sections 365/149 IPC, Police Station Khuian Sarwar, was registered against respondents No. 4 to 9, but they have joined the investigation. Investigation is going on. Petitioner was not co-operating with the police in searching her missing daughter. After lot of persuasion petitioner, gave the mobile number of the detenue i.e. 97807-04920. Respondents No. 4 to 9 also filed reply separately to the CRWP No. 1382 of 2009 -3- effect that on 13.4.2009, petitioner came to the house of answering respondents and took away Jaswinder Kaur on the pretext of cutting of wheat crop. After that Jaswinder Kaur, failed to return back to her matrimonial home. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that FIR No. 22 dated 25.1.2010, under Sections 365/149 IPC, Police Station Khuian Sarwar, was registered against respondents No. 4 to 9 but no one was taken into custody. Detenue is still missing. As per order dated 3.12.2010, direction was given to the learned State counsel to seek instructions as to whether State is ready to transfer the investigation of this case to some independent agency. Argued that according to the petitioner, Jaswinder Kaur, is missing from her matrimonial house w.e.f. May, 2009, whereas allegation of the respondents is that Jaswinder Kaur, had gone with the petitioner on the pretext of cutting of wheat crop on 13.4.2009. No effort is being made by the police to trace out Jaswinder Kaur. Learned State counsel argued that as per affidavit of DSP, Sub Division Abohar, efforts are being made to trace the girl but petitioner was not co-operating. After that it came to the notice of the Investigating Officer, that detenue had a telephonic call with the petitioner. Efforts were made to locate the location of the detenue as per telephonic call. Again status report was submitted to the effect that police is making efforts to trace the girl. Special Investigating Team was constituted but despite best efforts by the Special Investigating Team, girl is not traceable. Learned counsel for respondents No. 4 to 9 argued that detenue is with the petitioner but the petitioner is not co-operating with CRWP No. 1382 of 2009 -4- the police. Police is making efforts to trace the missing detenue. From the perusal of file one thing is clear that the detenue is the daughter of the petitioner. She is the legally wedded wife of respondent No.4-Balvir Singh. According to the petitioner, detenue is missing from the matrimonial home from the first week of May, 2009, but allegation of the respondents No. 4 to 9 is that detenue had gone along with the petitiner on 13.4.2009. As per different status reports on the file efforts are being made to trace the girl but allegation of the petitioner is that no sincere efforts were made by the Investigating Officer or the Special Investigating Team to trace the girl. Keeping in view the nature of offence, when detenue is still missing, investigation of the case i.e. FIR No. 22 dated 25.1.2010, under Sections 365/149 IPC, Police Station Khuian Sarwar, is ordered to be entrusted to the Crime Branch, Punjab. Incharge of the Crime Branch, Punjab, is directed to depute any responsible officer to investigate the controversy amongst the parties and submit his report within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. I hope petitioner and respondents No. 4 to 9, will co-operate with the Investigating Agency. For the reasons recorded above, the instant writ petition is disposed of. March 18, 2011 ( JORA SINGH ) rishu JUDGE