Crl. Misc. No.M-3782 of 2009 (O & M) - 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No.M-3782 of 2009 (O & M) Date of Decision: 25.07.2011. Poonam and another ……Petitioners Versus State of Haryana and others …...Respondents Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE L. N. MITTAL. Present: Mr. Arun Yadav, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. S. S. Nara, Sr. DAG, Haryana for the respondents. L.N. MITTAL, J (ORAL) Poonam and Mithun (widow and brother respectively of the deceased Naresh Kumar) have filed the instant petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short, Cr.P.C) seeking investigation by Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) or by some independent agency in FIR No. 65 dated 02.09.2008 under Section 302 IPC registered at Police Station,Rohari, Distt. Rewari. Petitioner No.2 lodged the aforesaid FIR alleging that on 01.09.2008 at about 7.00 PM, the deceased had gone out of the house after taking meal, but he did not return during the night and next morning his dead body was found lying near the wall of the school. Petitioner No.2, who lodged the FIR, stated that he did not Crl. Misc. No.M-3782 of 2009 (O & M) - 2 - know if Naresh Kumar was killed by beating or died for some other reason. In the instant petition, it was alleged that Abhimanyu had taken the deceased for some labour work on 01.09.2008 at about 7:00 PM. It is also alleged that inspite of representation; proper investigation has not been conducted in the case. Respondents No.1 to 4 in the reply alleged that on the request of the petitioners, investigation of the case was transferred from police station, Rohrai to CIA staff, Rewari. It was also mentioned that polygraph test of Abhimanyu and Surjeet was to be conducted. Thereafter status reports were furnished. Polygraph test was conducted on both of them and even second polygraph test was conducted. However, the case remained untraced inspite of all efforts to solve the case. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case file. Learned counsel for the petitioners vehemently contended that the case be handed-over to CBI for fair investigation. The contention cannot be accepted. It has been observed in orders dated 02.02.2010 and 15.07.2010 that the petitioners may refer to any material or evidence which was not taken into consideration by the investigating agency. However, counsel for the petitioners is unable to refer to any such material or evidence. On the contrary, in the FIR, even Abhimanyu was not named as suspect. Subsequently, Abhimanyu was named as suspect. Investigating agency conducted Crl. Misc. No.M-3782 of 2009 (O & M) - 3 - polygraph test on Abhimanyu and also on Surjeet, but nothing incriminating could be detected against them. Sincere efforts have been made to detect the culprits, but all efforts of the investigating agency in this direction have failed. There is nothing on record to doubt the sincerity or bona fide of the investigating agency. Every unsolved case cannot be referred to CBI for investigation. It is a case of blind murder. Nobody was named as suspect in the FIR. The Court has all the sympathy with the petitioners, who have lost their dear one. However, no ground for referring the case to CBI for investigation is made out. Already investigation was initially conducted by Police of the concerned Police Station and thereafter by CIA Staff. For the reasons aforesaid, I find no merit in the instant petition which is accordingly dismissed. (L. N. MITTAL) JUDGE 25.07.2011. A.kaundal