Crl.Misc. No.M-4299 of 2009(O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-4299 of 2009 (O&M) Date of Decision:March 25, 2010 Avtar Singh ...........Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others ..........Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Sabina Present: Mr.K.S.Bhullar, Advocate for Mr.S.P.S.Sidhu,Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Amandeep Singh Rai,Additional Advocate General Punjab ** Sabina, J. This petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short`Cr.P.C.') by the petitioner for issuance of a direction to the respondents to register an FIR against accused persons, namely, Amrik Singh, Mohan Devi, Har Krishan Singh, Om Parkash, and Sohan Lal on the basis of letter (Annexure P1). The case of the petitioner in brief is that the petitioner is cultivating 14 kanals of land belonging to the Central Government for the last so many years. Out of the said land, allotment was shown to have been made in favour of mother of Om Parkash. Thereafter, name of Om Parkash figured in the column of ownership. Om Parkash executed sale deeds in favour of Surjit Singh, Amrik Singh, Kabal Singh. In fact, Om Parkash by Crl.Misc. No.M-4299 of 2009(O&M) 2 forging entries in the back date has shown that the land had been allotted to his family. Petitioner appeared before the Financial Commissioner Punjab and it was ordered vide letter dated 8.5.2008 that a criminal case be registered against the culprits after investigation. However, so far no case had been registered by the respondents against the culprits. Respondents No. 1, 2 and 4 in its reply has submitted that, in fact, a thorough investigation had been conducted in this case and the application moved by the petitioner was found to be false. The Financial Commissioner Revenue Chandigarh had directed that a case be registered against the officials who had lost the file and it was further directed that the missing file be traced. Amrik Singh, Surjit Singh, Kabal Singh had purchased the land from Sohan Lal and Om Parkash in September, 2004 and, thereafter, mutation was sanctioned in their favour. The land was allotted to the family of Om Parkash. The sale deed was executed in the presence of Sub Registrar and witnesses on 20.9.2004. A civil litigation was pending between the parties. Respondent No.3 in its reply has submitted that the land in question was allotted to Dhanpat Rai through Mohan Devi. Possession of the land was delivered to Sohan Lal, attorney of Mohan Devi. Tarlok Singh Bedi, Clerk was handed over the file in question. He retired on 21.9.1984 and, thereafter, he has died. Hence, it was not possible to fix the responsibility regarding loss of file on any person. Petitioner had given an application to the Deputy Commissioner, Ferozepur and had threatened to commit suicide along with his family members. In the status report filed by way of short additional affidavit of Crl.Misc. No.M-4299 of 2009(O&M) 3 respondent No.3, it was stated that Mohan Devi was still owner of 6 kanals 5 marlas of land out of 18 kanals 13 marlas of land. Out of the allotted 34 kanals 7 marlas of land to Dhanpat Rai, petitioner was in possession of only 3 kanals of land. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the opinion that no ground for interference by this Court is made out. The matter in question has been duly inquired into by the respondents. Petitioner has based his claim on the basis of letter dated 8.5.2008 (Annexure P1) written by the Financial Commissioner, Punjab Chandigarh. As per the said letter, it was stated that it had been decided by the Government that a case be got registered regarding missing of the files and filed be traced so that the Officer who is responsible for missing of files and fraud are appropriately dealt with. In this case, the official, who had last dealt with the file, has since died and in these circumstances, the investigating agency after investigation found that it was not possible to fix the responsibility of any person. Petitioner is not related to Dhanpat Rai. Hence, no ground for interference is made out. Dismissed. (Sabina) Judge March 25 , 2010 arya