IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.O.C.P. No.570 of 2008 Date of Decision:- 22.05.2008 Balbir Singh ....Petitioner(s) through Mr.Pankaj Bali, Advocate vs. Ashwinder Singh Chawla ....Respondent(s) through Mr.R.S.Kundu, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. *** CORAM:-HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. *** 1) Whether Reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2) To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3) Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? *** SURYA KANT, J. (ORAL) The petitioner filed Crl.Misc.No.50023-M of 2007 which was disposed of by this Court on November 1, 2007 with a direction to the Superintendent of Police, Karnal to look into the grievance of the petitioner as contained in representation (Annexure P-9) and to do the needful in accordance with law. In response to the show cause notice, the respondent has filed his reply/affidavit wherein particulars of the alleged enquiry having been got conducted into the complaint, have been disclosed. Learned counsel for the petitioner, however, contends that the Police Authorities are hand in glove with the opposite party and have falsely implicated the petitioner in more than one case. I have heard learned counsel for the parties I am of the C.O.C.P. No.570 of 2008 -2- considered view that the contentions raised on behalf of the petitioner cannot be gone into in these contempt proceedings. Since the respondent has held an enquiry as directed by this Court, there appears to be no necessity to con0000000.0tinue with these proceedings which are accordingly dropped, however, with liberty to the petitioner to impugn the enquiry report and/or the stand taken by the Police Authorities before an appropriate Forum, if so advised. Rule discharged. May 22, 2008 ( SURYA KANT ) poonam JUDGE