IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-2094 of 2008 Date of Decision: November 05, 2008 Seema and others. … Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and others. … Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.D. ANAND Present : Mr. S.S. Rana, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. Manjari Nehru, DAG, Punjab. **** S.D. Anand, J. The grievance of the petitioners was that an unauthorized raid was conducted by the respondents on their house on 07.01.2008, that signatures of three witnesses (Chanan Singh sonof Bhagat Ram, Devo wife of Balbir and Gurbax Kaur daughter of Gurmit Singh) were obtained on blank papers and that the police had taken away an Esteem Car (bearing registration No. CH- Crl. Misc. No. M-2094 of 2008 01-R 0095) and cash amount Rs.73,000/- from the house. The petitioners were directed to report at the Police Station which they did, but could not have audience with the Station House Officer as he was on leave. The petitioners made a grievance of the above facts by moving a representation (Annexure P/5) to the Senior Superintendent of Police, Nawanshahr. The respondents are harassing the petitioners by calling them repeatedly to the Police Station. No case has, however, been registered against the petitioners otherwise. In similarly circumstances, this Court passed the following order in Crl. Misc. No. 57772-M of 2006, decided on 21.09.2006:- “The present petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent Nos. 2 and 3 to comply with the provisions of Section 160 Cr.P.C. in the event of the petitioner, being called for his assistance in any enquiry. In case, the petitioner is sought to be arrested, in any case arising out of matrimonial dispute with Smt. Manisha, respondent Nos. 2 and 3, shall serve an advance notice of three days before effecting his arrest.” On the above facts, the petitioners applied for the issuance of a direction to the respondents to give the 2 Crl. Misc. No. M-2094 of 2008 former seven days advance notice, if they were wanted in any case. In the counter, the respondents have made a precise averment that the esteem car aforementioned had been taken into possession on 07.01.2008 for an offence under Section 25 of the Police Act because the petitioners had failed to produce any document of title qua it. DDR No. 40 dated 08.01.2008 (Police Station Sadar, Nawanshahr) came to be recorded on the basis thereof. It denied that any cash amount had been recovered from the house of the petitioners or that any such amount had taken along by the police from the house of the petitioners. The further averment is that petitioner No.4 had filed a Criminal Writ Petition No. 101 of 2008 (Makhan vs. State of Punjab) on these very allegations. That writ petition was dismissed by this Court (vide order dated 01.02.2008 – Annexure R/1) holding that the petition aforementioned constitutes an abuse of the process of the Court. The petition shall stand disposed of with a direction that whenever the presence of the petitioners is required at the Police Station in connection with the investigation of any case, they shall be summoned to the Police Station only in accordance with law. Disposed of accordingly. 3 Crl. Misc. No. M-2094 of 2008 November 05, 2008 ( S.D. Anand ) vkd Judge 4