IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.4161 of 2011 Date of Decision : March 08, 2011. Nar Singh .....Petitioner versus State of Punjab and others .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. Present : Mr.Hari Om Attri, Advocate, for the petitioner. -.- 1. Whether Reporters of 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 while seeking further investigation in the case FIR No.35 dated 28.3.2008 registered at Police Station Ghagga, District Patiala under Sections 25, 15, 61, 85 of the N.D.P.S. Act, also seeks quashing of the aforesaid FIR as well as the order dated 27.1.2009 (Annexure P-4) passed by the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Samana declaring the petitioner as a proclaimed offender. As per the allegations contained in the FIR, the vehicle TATA Make bearing registration No.HR39A-1782 and owned by the petitioner, was intercepted while carrying 3 bags of poppy husk. The petitioner, on the other hand, claims that the above stated vehicle had already been sold by him to one Shakti Singh son of Parkash Singh, resident of Shakti Nagar, C.W.P.No .4161 of 2011 2 District Kaithal on 17.8.2006. Reliance is placed on a certificate issued by the Registration Authority, Kaithal on 28.10.2010. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and on perusal of the material on record, I am of the considered view that no definite opinion can be formed by a writ Court that the petitioner was not the owner of the vehicle in question on the date when it was apprehended alongwith the contrabands. The petitioner, if so advised, may obtain certified copy of the registration certificate in favour of Shakti Singh son of Parkash Singh, resident of Shakti Nagar, District Kaithal as on 17.8.2006 and based thereupon may seek his remedy in the proceedings wherein he has been declared a proclaimed offender as may enable him to lead evidence and prove before the Special Court that the vehicle in question was actually not owned by him at the relevant time. Ordered accordingly. Dasti. March 08, 2011 (SURYA KANT) Mohinder JUDGE