Crl. Misc. No. M-10916 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-10916 of 2010(O&M) Date of decision: August 10, 2010 Balbir Singh ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others ...Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURDEV SINGH Present: Mr. JS Thind, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. AS Brar, Sr. DAG, Punjab. GURDEV SINGH, J. Heard. The Officer-in-charge of the Police Station has not come present. It has been submitted by the learned State counsel that additional SHO of that Police Station has come present as the Officer-in-charge is lying ill. Even that additional SHO has not brought the record which was called from the Police Station. From withholding of the record, an inference can easily be drawn that it contains the entry regarding the receipt of the application moved by the petitioner, copy of which is annexed with the petition as Annexure P/5. This petition has been filed by the petitioner-Balbir Singh, under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, for issuance of direction to respondents No. 1 to 3 to provide protection to him and his family members so that they may harvest their wheat crop standing in the land in dispute and further for issuance of direction to respondents No. 2 Crl. Misc. No. M-10916 of 2010 2 and 3 to investigate the matter and take appropriate action. According to the petitioner, he is coming in the peaceful possession of the land described in paragraph 1 of the petition as gair masuri under the Central Government and is recorded as such in the revenue record. His crop is standing in this land which is ripe for harvesting but the private respondents are not allowing him to do so. He moved representation/complaint before the Officer-in-charge of the Police Station, but no action has been taken thereon. The said application/complaint discloses the commission of cognizable offence, as it is described therein that Varinderpal Singh and others committed theft of pipe of the bore and one plastic pipe. The Officer-in-charge of the Police Station is to conduct investigation into the allegations contained in that complaint and to take action as required by law. It is also stated in the complaint that Varinderpal Singh and others are threatening the petitioner. The official respondents are to provide necessary protection to him and his family members. However, such protection cover is not to be used by the petitioner for harvesting the crop standing in the land in dispute for which he has already gone in civil litigation. This order shall not effect the proceedings being taken by the civil court. The petition is disposed of accordingly. August 10, 2010 (GURDEV SINGH ) prem JUDGE