Crl. Misc.No.M 10654 of 2010 #1# IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl. Misc.No.M 10654 of 2010 Date of Decision:-06.12.2010 Tarlok Nath @ Ravi. ......Petitioner. Versus State of Punjab & Ors. ......Respondent. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH. Present:- Mr. H.S. Dhandi, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. Gaurav Garg Dhuriwala, AAG Punjab. *** JASWANT SINGH, J(ORAL) Crl. Misc.No.19195 of 2010 Allowed as prayed for. Crl. Misc.No.M 10654 of 2010 Prayer is under Section 482 Cr.PC for issuance of directions to protect the life and liberty of the petitioner at the hands of respondents no.4 & 5(police officials) and not to call the petitioner again and again in Police Station and not to visit the house of the petitioner again and again and directions be issued to respondents no.1 to 3 to take action against the respondents no.4 & 5 for torturing and harassment caused to the petitioner and further in case petitioner is required in any cognizable offence, he be Crl. Misc.No.M 10654 of 2010 #2# given 7 days prior notice. It is submitted that one Sukhdev Raj son of Bishan Dass lodged an FIR No.116 dated 17.5.2009 under Sections 365, 120-B IPC P.S. Sadar, Jalandhar against the petitioner alleging therein that his son Kamal had gone with petitioner-Tarlok Nath @ Ravi on 13.5.2009 and thereafter his whereabouts are not known regarding which aforesaid FIR was lodged and the police of PS Sadar Jalandhar arrested the petitioner. Subsequently the petitioner was enlarged on bail by the learned trial court. It appears that police of Police Station Behrampur recovered one unidentified body and FIR No.40 dated 14.5.2009 under Section 302 of IPC was registered in Police Station Behram, District SBS Nagar (Nawanshahar). The unidentified dead body was subsequently identified from the photographs and belongings to be that of Kamal son of Sukhdev Raj qua whose disappearance FIR No.116 dated 17.5.2009 had already been lodged in PS Sadar, Jalandhar. Further stated that the investigations are being conducted from different angles by working on different theories and, therefore, at times notices have been issued under Section 160 asking the petitioner to join investigations to probe his link in the murder of deceased Kamal. Learned State Counsel on instructions from HC Inderjit Singh submits that after thorough investigation in the murder of Kamal son of Sukhdev Raj nothing fruitful had emerged and, therefore, untrace report was prepared on 25.9.2010 and submitted in the court of competent jurisdiction. He thus contends that the apprehension of the petitioner is wholly misplaced and the petition liable to be dismissed being misconceived. In these circumstances when the untrace report has already Crl. Misc.No.M 10654 of 2010 #3# been filed, in my opinion no further orders are required to be passed in the instant petition which has become infructuous. Dismissed as infructuous. ( JASWANT SINGH ) JUDGE 06th December, 2010 Vinay