CRM No. M 16496 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH -- CRM No. M 16496 of 2010 Date of decision: 02.02.2011 Deep Kaur ........ Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others .......Respondent(s) Coram: Hon'ble Ms Justice Nirmaljit Kaur -.- Present: Mr. Surinder Mohan Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Amit Rana, DAG, Haryana for the respondent - State Mr. Vishal Garg Narwana, Advocate for Respondent No. 4 Mr. Mohnish Sharma, Advocate for Mr. Narender Hooda, Advocate for respondent No. 7 -.- 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? 3. Whether the judgement should be reported in the Digest? Nirmaljit Kaur, J. (Oral) This is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C for directing respondent Nos. 2 and 3 to proceed as per law in FIR No. 24 dated 16.02.2010 unde Section 376(g), 328, 120-B, 506 IPC registered at Police Station Ambala Sadar, Ambala. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that till date no final CRM No. M 16496 of 2010 2 report has been submitted inspite of the fact that FIR was registered in way back on 06.02.2010. Whereas, Mr. Amit Rana, DAG, Haryana, on instructions from SI Som Nath, states that the final report has been submitted before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate. Heard. Serious allegations have been levelled in the FIR. In fact, status report has been submitted. Reply to the status report has also been filed by learned counsel for the petitioner. As per the said reply, the petitioner is being threatened by one SI Som Nath from his mobile phone. It is further stated that he is related to respondent No. 4. It is also stated that the investigation was never conducted by the three police officials, namely, SHO - Naresh, ASP -Abhishek Garg and DSP - Rameshwar Dass and that the petitioner was never called by these officers to join the investigation. Learned State counsel as well as learned counsel for the private respondents, however, dispute the said fact. Taking into account that the allegations as well as the involvement of some of the influential persons and the reply to the status report, it appears that the inquiry as of now conducted has not been carried out in a fair and impartial manner. It would, therefore, be appropriate if the investigation is handed over to the State Crime Branch to be conducted by its officer not below the rank of Superintendent of Police. The petitioner shall be allowed to join in the said inquiry. However, as and when the petitioner is required to appear before the Investigating Team, she will be allowed to be accompanied by one of her close male relative. After CRM No. M 16496 of 2010 3 completing the inquiry, final report shall be submitted as expeditiously as possible preferably within three months from today. The present petition is accordingly disposed of. Copy of the order be supplied to the learned State counsel under signatures of the Reader attached to the Bench. (Nirmaljit Kaur) Judge 02.02.2011 mohan