IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No.63936 of 2009 And Crl. Misc. Nos. M-24541 of 2009 Date of decision : 16.12.2009 M/s. Kashmira Estates Pvt. Ltd. …. Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and another …. Respondents Present: Mr. Gagan Chhabra, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Rajeev K. Takkar, Addl. AG, Haryana. **** S.S. SARON, J. Reply on behalf of Sh. Satender Kumar Gupta, IPS, Deputy Commissioner of Police, Traffic, Gurgaon (respondent No.2) filed in Court today is taken on record. Crl. Misc. No.63936 of 2006 This order will dispose of nine Crl. Misc. applications (i.e. Crl. Misc. Nos. 63935 to 63942 and 64018 of 2009) seeking filing of rejoinder to the reply filed by the petitioner. The rejoinder by way of affidavit on behalf of the petitioner attached with the aforesaid Crl. Misc. applications are taken on record subject to just exceptions. Crl. Misc. applications stand disposed of. Crl. Misc. No M-24541 of 2009 This order will dispose of nine Crl. Misc. petitions (i.e. Crl. Misc. Nos. M-24537 to 24545 of 2009) field by the respective Crl. Misc. No.63936 of 2009 [2] And Crl. Misc. Nos. M-24541 of 2009 petitioners against the order dated 8.7.2009 (Annexure P17) passed by the learned Ilaqa Magisrate, Gurgaon whereby the application of the petitioners complainants for the supply entire set of documents and final report filed by the police seeking cancellation of FIR has been disallowed. A reading of the order dated 8.7.2009 (Annexure P17) which is impugned by the respective petitioners in their petitions would show that the complainants (petitioners herein) had moved an application for obtaining copies of documents pertaining to the investigations in the case. It was observed by the learned Magistrate that no provision in regard to supplying of documents is mentioned in the application that was moved and counsel for the complainant (petitioner herein) also stated at the bar that there was no law in his knowledge. It is also observed that the learned counsel for the complainant (petitioner herein) could not produce any judgment in this regard. Furthermore, it was recorded that the learned counsel stated at bar that it is up to the discretion of the Court to accept or dismiss the application. The learned Magistrate taking into consideration the aforesaid arguments as well as the relevant provisions, was of the opinion that there was no law under which the documents asked for could be directed to be given to the complainant. Hence the application was dismissed. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in terms of the judgment of Supreme Court in Bhagwant Singh v. Commissioner of Police, AIR 1985 SC 1285, the petitioner is entitled to obtain the copy of the cancellation report which would also mean Crl. Misc. No.63936 of 2009 [3] And Crl. Misc. Nos. M-24541 of 2009 that he is entitled to the other documents in support thereof. However, the said judgment, it is submitted, was not in his knowledge and therefore, could not be cited before the learned Magistrate. Learned counsel for the State has submitted that the petitioners who are the complainants are only entitled to file a petition to oppose the acceptance of the cancellation report and are not entitled to the documents in support of the cancellation report which they may obtain on examination of the file or by applying for certified copies of the documents or by resorting to the provisions of Right to Information Act. It is submitted that the copy of the cancellation report is being handed over to the learned counsel for the petitioner in Court today. After giving my thoughtful consideration to the matter, keeping in view the fact that the judgment of Bhagwant Singh v. Commissioner of Police (supra) could not be cited before the learned trial Magistrate, it would be just and expedient that the order dated 8.7.2009 (Annexure P17) is set aside and quashed and the matter is reconsidered by the learned Magistrate. The copy of the cancellation report has been supplied to the counsel for the petitioners in Court today. The learned Magistrate is, therefore, to consider as to whether the petitioners are entitled to copies of documents in support of the cancellation report. Accordingly, the nine Crl. Misc. petitions (Crl. Misc. Nos. M-24537 to 24545 of 2009) are disposed of by setting aside and quashing the order dated 8.7.2009 (Annexure P17) passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Gurgaon in the said petitions and the learned Magistrate shall reconsider the matter regarding Crl. Misc. No.63936 of 2009 [4] And Crl. Misc. Nos. M-24541 of 2009 supplying of documents in support of the cancellation report to the complainants. The matter shall be reconsidered uninfluenced by any observations made herein. (S.S. SARON) JUDGE December 16, 2009 amit