IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Writ Petition No. 1052 of 2010 Date of Decision : September 27, 2010 Simranjeet Kaur ....Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.P.S. MANN Present: Mr. B.C.Bitta, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. P.S. Sidhu, Additional Advocate General, Punjab T.P.S. MANN, J.(Oral) According to the petitioner, her husband was whisked away by respondents No. 4 and 5 on 24.5.2010 at about 11.00 a.m., although no criminal case was pending against him. He had not been produced in the Court and, instead, he was being kept in illegal custody at Police Station Zirakpur and sometimes shifted to other places. Upon issuance of notice of motion, the Warrant Officer nominated by the Registry pursuant to the directions issued by this Court, visited Police Station Zirakpur on 25.5.2010 at 6.00 p.m. and found Gurjeet Singh, husband of the petitioner, sitting in the Police Crl. Writ Petition No. 1052 of 2010 -2- Station in front of the table of Sunil Kumar. At that time, Inspector Yogi Raj, S.H.O. and Gurmail Singh, Munshi were also present in the Police Station. As Gurjeet Singh was not wanted by the police in any case, he was set at liberty there and then. At the time of hearing of the matter on 27.5.2010, the Roznamcha kept at Police Station Zirakpur was perused. It was found that the carbon copies of the entries made on 24.5.2010, 25.5.2010 and 26.5.2010 were still lying pinned in the Roznamcha and not sent to the senior officers. Reply was filed by respondents No.4 and 5. According to Inspector Yogi Raj, an application was received from Raj Singh and others of Chaudhary Colony, Zirakpur on 19.5.2010 that some unwanted persons while in the company of women had been coming to the top floor of House No. 622/10-C of their colony and creating unnecessary disturbance. Raj Singh and others had requested for taking appropriate action against the unwanted persons. Upon receiving the said complaint, Gurjeet Singh, husband of the petitioner, was summoned to the Police Station, who came there on 25.5.2010 at about 5.00 p.m. Neither he was kept in illegal custody nor any restraints placed on his movements. He was simply questioned about the application submitted by Raj Singh and others. However, in the meantime, the Warrant Officer had visited the Police Station and found Gurjeet Singh in the Crl. Writ Petition No. 1052 of 2010 -3- Police Station. The photocopy of the application submitted by Raj Singh and others was produced, which was taken on record. When Inspector Yogi Raj Singh was asked as to why no entry had been made in the Roznamcha regarding the receipt of the aforementioned application submitted by Raj Singh and others on 19.5.2010, he stated that an entry was made at serial No. 575 in register No. V-D meant for recording the local complaints. However, no corresponding entry was shown to have been made in the Roznamcha regarding sending of notice to Gurjeet Singh for appearing in the Police Station in connection with the aforementioned complaint nor about his arrival in the Police Station on 25.5.2010 nor also in respect of his questioning in regard to the aforementioned complaint. The Court also expressed its displeasure in the act of Inspector Yogi Raj in not submitting the carbon copies of the entries made in the Roznamcha to the senior officers as required under Rule 22.48 of Volume 3, Chapter 22 of the Punjab Police Rules, 1934. Accordingly, the Court deemed it fit to order an enquiry to be conducted by Additional District & Sessions Judge, Mohali. Pursuant to the directions issued by the Court, Additional District & Sessions Judge, Mohali conducted an enquiry and has submitted his report dated 19.8.2010. Its concluding portion is reproduced here-in-below:- Crl. Writ Petition No. 1052 of 2010 -4- “From the statements and the documents on the file, it is evident that Bhupinder Singh son of Dharam Singh and 7-8 other persons of the locality had given an application to SHO Yogi Raj on 19.5.2010 to the effect that some unidentified persons in the company of women are coming to the top floor of House No. 622/10-C at odd times and creates unnecessary disturbance. They have one Maruti Car No. CH01-U- 2282. When, they were asked by the residents of the colony, they had been abusing them. Therefore, request has been made through this application to take appropriate action against those unwanted and unknown persons. In pursuance of this application, Gurjeet Singh, husband of petitioner Simranjit Kaur was called in the Police Station on 25.5.2010 at about 6 p.m. Admittedly, above said Gurjeet Singh was not detained in any lock up. Rather, he was found sitting on a table by the Warrant Officer. Of course, no entry of the complaint Ex.PA filed by Bhupinder Singh, Raj Kumar and others was made in the Roznamcha register on 19.5.2010. However, it was found entered in register No. V-D at Sr. No. 757 dated 19.5.2010. But, as admitted by Sh. Yogi Raj, SHO, the copy of this V-D register is not sent to the higher authorities, nor the fate of the complaints entered in this register is mentioned against their entries. This register is also not page marked, nor signed or verified by any higher officer. The entries made in this register are also not signed either by the SHO or by the official who enters the complaint. It is in the statement of HC Crl. Writ Petition No. 1052 of 2010 -5- Barinder Singh that the entry of the complaint Ex.PA in register V-D was not shown to the Warrant Officer when he visited the Police Station. It is also not disputed that no entry was made in the Roznamcha regarding sending of notice to Gurjeet Singh for appearing in the Police Station in connection with the complaint Ex.PA, nor his arrival in the Police Station on 25.5.2010 was entered in the Roznamcha. But, from the statement of Bhupinder Singh, who runs a factory of making ributs and has employed 15 persons in the factory, it is evident that the complaint Ex.PA was given by him and other persons of the locality on 19.5.2010 and in connection with that complaint, the police had raided the House No.622 on that very day. Before giving the complaint Ex.PA to the police of Police Station Zirakpur, the meeting of the people of the locality was convened at 3 p.m., where it was decided that they should file the complaint before the police about the activities which are being carried out in the aforesaid flat by unwanted persons and after that decision, this complaint Ex.PA was filed in Police Station Zirakpur. From the facts and circumstances on the file, it appears that the respondent police officials are negligent in not making the entry of complaint Ex.PA in Roznamcha and also not maintaining the Roznamcha properly in the Police Station, as per the Punjab Police Rules, 1934. As per rules, they were required to enter all the complaints received in the Police Station in the Roznamcha and they were also required to make the Crl. Writ Petition No. 1052 of 2010 -6- entry regarding the arrival of the persons, against whom, those complaints are filed in the said Roznamcha and they were also required to make entry in the said Roznamcha regarding the notices sent to those persons. From the statements, referred above, I am of the considered opinion that PW Bhupinder Singh son of Dharam Singh and other persons of the locality had given the complaint Ex.PA in the Police Station Zirakpur on 19.5.2010 for taking action regarding unlawful activities being carried on in Flat No. 633/10- C. But, this complaint was not entered either in the Roznamcha or in the V-D register on that day. It appears that this complaint was entered in V-D register later on. Had it been entered on 19.5.2010, the date on which it was given, then the entries of this register must have been shown to the Warrant Officer. Therefore, the respondent police officials are found to be negligent in performing their duties as well as for procedural lapse”. The Enquiry Officer has come to the conclusion that the police officials were negligent in not making entry of complaint submitted by Raj Singh and others in the Roznamcha and also in not maintaining the Roznamcha properly in the Police Station as per Punjab Police Rules, 1934. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that Gurjeet Singh, husband of the petitioner, was released by the police on Crl. Writ Petition No. 1052 of 2010 -7- 25.5.2010 itself. Thereafter, the police officials have also returned the car and the mobile phones belonging to Gurjeet Singh. In view of the above, the petition qua the prayer made by the petitioner for release of her husband Gurjeet Singh from illegal detention has been rendered infructuous and is, accordingly, disposed of. However, a copy of this order be sent to Director General of Police, Punjab, who shall take appropriate action on the report of Additional District & Sessions Judge, Mohali regarding the irregularities/illegalities committed by the police officials, under intimation to this Court. ( T.P.S.MANN ) September 27, 2010 JUDGE ajay-1