Crl. Misc. No. 34619 of 2010 (O&M) [ 1 ] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. 34619 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: February 7, 2011 Chander Shekhar .............................................................. Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others ........................................... Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Ms. Justice Ritu Bahri 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present: Mr. Raj Mohan Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Kshitij Sharma, AAG, Haryana, for respondent Nos. 1 to 4. ... RITU BAHRI, J. This petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is for directing respondent Nos. 2 to 4 to register a criminal case against respondent Nos. 5 to 12 on the basis of endorsement made by the Additional Superintendent of Police dated 27.3.2010 on the complaint dated 27.3.2010 (Annexure P-1). On 12.3.2010, brother of the petitioner namely Tara Chand went to his duty in the morning. In the evening, Tara Chand was brought by two persons on motorcycle and the petitioner was informed that Tara Chand Crl. Misc. No. 34619 of 2010 (O&M) [ 2 ] consumed some poison. Dinesh Sharma and Mohan Sharma were also present in the house of the petitioner and they took Tara Chand to the hospital, where he expired. Post-mortem was conducted on 13.3.2010. The petitioner inquired from the Doctor regarding the cause of death of his brother. He was informed that there were some internal injuries on the person of Tara Chand. The petitioner was informed by his brother Inderjit that on an earlier occasion on 29.8.2009 respondent Nos. 5 to 12 had fired upon the deceased Tara Chand. A complaint had been made to the police but no action was taken. The petitioner made a written complaint to respondent No.3 on 27.3.2010. In the complaint it has been mentioned that the cause of death according to the post-mortem report can be given after the FSL report in respect of Vissra and blood reports. The report of FSL shows the following facts:- “1. Aluminium phosphide was detected in exhibita – 1a 1b and 1c. 2. No common poison could be detected in exhibit – 1d.” Ex.1a is stomach, part of small and large intestine. Ex. 1B is portion of lungs, liver, spleen, kidney and brain. Ex. 1c is blood from heart approx 5 ml. and Ex. 1d is Saline preservative approx 10 ml. As per the FSL report, no common poison has been detected in the stomach. The administration of poison is result of forcibly receiving poison either through injection or through some different mechanism not through the mouth. On 27.3.2010, the Additional Superintendent of Police, Palwal, made an endorsement for registration of a case. Since no report has been Crl. Misc. No. 34619 of 2010 (O&M) [ 3 ] registered despite the repeated requests of the petitioner, the petitioner alleges that an amount of `15,000/- has been paid to Manohar Lal, Incharge Police Post, Hathin Gate and `25,000/- to the S.H.O., Police Station City Palwal, in the presence of Mohan Sharma and Dinesh Sharma who have executed affidavits dated 31.3.2010. Reply has been filed by Rajbir Singh, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Hathin, on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 to 4. In the reply, reference has been made to a statement made by the petitioner on 13.3.2010 in which he has said that his brother Tara Chand was ill for a few days and in the evening, while there was no electricity, he by mistake consumed aluminium phosphide tablet. This was the cause of death of Tara Chand. An opinion of the Court has been recorded in which it has been sought that the injuries found on the person of the deceased could be by falling after consuming poison. There has been an ongoing litigation between the petitioner and respondent Nos. 5 to 11 over a piece of land. During the inquiry, nobody was found guilty. As per the FSL report, aluminium phosphide has been detected in stomach, intestine, lungs, liver, kidney and spleen. In the proceedings conducted under Section 174 Cr.P.C. the petitioner, his brother Inderjit and his cousin brother Laxmi Kant have stated that the deceased Tara Chand has died due to consumption of aluminium phosphide instead of taking his medicine which was kept lying in the room where there was no light. Heard learned counsel for the parties. After going through the case file, one thing is clear that as per the FSL report contents of aluminium phosphide have been detected. This poison has been found in the stomach, intestine, lungs, liver, kidney, spleen Crl. Misc. No. 34619 of 2010 (O&M) [ 4 ] and brain. There is no discrepancy in the statement made by the petitioner before the police which he is disputing now. In that statement, it was categorically mentioned that the petitioner's brother had consumed aluminium phosphide by mistake. In the FSL report, the contents of aluminium phosphide have been found. This statement has been given on 13.3.2010. However, after a gap of 13 days i.e. on 27.3.2010 a complaint was sent to the S.H.O. Palwal for registering a case. After the inquiry was endorsed by Additional Superintendent of Police, it was found that the petitioner along with his brother Inderjit and cousin brother Laxmi Kant had stated that no offence is made out against respondent Nos. 5 to 11. The version of the petitioner that the police has got his signatures on 13.3.2010 on blank paper does not appear to be true because the chemical examination report from FSL Madhuban came much later in time and the cause of death as per the original statement and chemical report is the same i.e. consumption of aluminium phosphide. In view of the above, no need for re-investigation. Petition is dismissed. 7.2.2011 ( RITU BAHRI ) Rupi JUDGE