IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM M-16959 of 2009 Date of Decision:21.1.2010 Baljit Singh .... Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others .... Respondents CORAM: Hon'ble Ms. Justice Nirmaljit Kaur Present: Mr. Munish Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. K.S. Pannu, D.A.G. Punjab. Mr. K.S. Sandhu, Advocate for respondent No.5. **** 1.Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers 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? NIRMALJIT KAUR, J. The present petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for issuance of a direction to the official respondents not to harass the petitioner at the instance of private respondent No.5 and not to call him to the Police Station and also not to pressurize him to make the payment to private respondent No.5. Upon notice, reply has been filed by way of an affidavit of Narinder Pal Singh, P.P.S, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Raikot, District Ludhiana (Rural), stating therein that the petitioner is not required by the local police and the complaint (Annexure P-1) filed against him by respondent No.5 has already been got enquired and filed after the enquiry conducted by the official respondent vide his enquiry report Annexure R-1. It is further stated that the petitioner was summoned by the official respondent only in connection with his own complaint Annexure P-4. However, perusal of the complaint Annexure P-4 shows that the same has got nothing to do with the son of the petitioner i.e. Jassi who was also summoned vide Annexure P-4. Without making any observations on merits of the case, the respondents are directed to be careful. In view of the stand of the official respondents taken in the CRM M-16959 of 2009 -2- written statement that the petitioner is not required by them, the present petition has become infructuous and is disposed of as such. 21.1.2010 ( NIRMALJIT KAUR ) rajeev JUDGE