Crl.M.No. M-10670/2010(O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl.M.No. M-10670/2010(O&M) Date of decision: 21.7.2010. Tejinder Kaur ....................Petitioner v. State of Punjab and others .....................Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr.Justice Jaswant Singh Present: Mr.Raman Preet,Advocate for the petitioner. Jaswant Singh.J.(Oral) Present petition under Section 482 Cr.PC has been filed by the complainant for directing the respondents-investigating agency to add offence under Section 452 IPC in the challan filed against the accused named in case FIR No.1 dated 3.6.2008 under Sections 380/342/506/298/148/149 IPC, PS NRI,District Jalandhar. In brief the facts are that petitioner-complainant was the adopted daughter of Sant Kartar Singh, having a Dera and Gurudwara in Village Nandanpur, PO Nagra,Tehsil and District Jalandhar. He during his lifetime executed a registered Will dated 27.9.1991 bequeathing all his immovable and moveable property to the petitioner. He died on 3.6.1998 leaving behind the petitioner as the only legal heir. The petitioner is married to an NRI and is residing in England. She had handed over the charge of Langar Hall of Gurudwara Sahib to the accused Gurnam Singh, Gurcharan Singh, Crl.M.No. M-10670/2010(O&M) 2 Kulvinder Kaur, Resham Singh and Binder Kaur Sodhi, who were residing in one portion of the Dera, whereas the petitioner had locked her residential accommodation in the said Dera. The allegations are that when petitioner came back to the Dera from England in the month of April 2008, she found that lock of her residential accommodation had been broken and valuable articles like Digital Camera, DVD Player and 275 pounds were stolen. She lodged the aforementioned FIR wherein at the time of filing of the challan the offence under Section 452 Cr.PC was not included as the premises in the Gurudwara were treated to be a public place. At the time of arguments learned counsel very fairly states that as on today the charge has been framed against the accused named in the FIR. It is also not disputed that the petitioner has an alternative remedy of filing a revision against the charge sheet as well as moving the Court for alteration of charge. Therefore, at this stage the petition is wholly misconceived and no direction in exercise of jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.PC can be issued to official respondents-State of Punjab. Dismissed. 21.7.2010 (Jaswant Singh) joshi Judge