IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Criminal Miscellaneous No. M-31898 of 2011 Date of Decision: October 19, 2011 Santosh Bindra & another .....PETITIONER(S) VERSUS State of Punjab & others .....RESPONDENT(S) . . . CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: - Mr. Raj Kumar Gupta, Advocate, for the petitioners. . . . AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral) 1. It is not in dispute that daughter of petitioner No.1 was involved in committing the offence of murder in crime reported as FIR No.112 dated 22.7.2002, under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC, registered with Police Station, Islamabad, Amritsar. The said person is not traceable. 2. By virtue of this petition, learned counsel prays for a direction to the respondents not to raid the house of the petitioners. 3. Since the daughter of petitioner No.1 is wanted Crl. Misc. No. M-31898 of 2011 [2] in a criminal case, the police authorities are required to make efforts to arrest the accused. No directions can be issued so as to discourage the police authorities from tracing the daughter of petitioner No.1. Under the circumstances, no ground for issuance of directions is made out. 4. It has been vehemently argued that the petitioners are being called to the police station and are made to sit for long durations. It has been argued that by virtue of detention of the petitioners, they are being held vicariously liable for the acts committed by Babita, daughter of petitioner No.1. 5. I have considered this contention also. No relevant particulars have been given in the petition so as to show as to on which date and what time, petitioners were called to the police station. It is not disclosed as to who summoned the petitioners to the police station so as to harass them. For lack of proper foundation in the petition also, no favourable directions can be issued. 6. The petition is dismissed. (AJAI LAMBA) October 19, 2011 JUDGE avin 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?