IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.21013 of 2010 Date of Decision : November 26, 2010. Arshdeep Singh @ Sukhbir Singh and another .....Petitioners versus State of Punjab and others .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. Present : Mr.Baljinder Singh Sra, Advocate, for the petitioners Mr.A.S.Grewal, Addl.AG, Punjab for respondent nos.1 to 4. -.- 1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? --- Surya Kant, J. (Oral) Notice of motion. Mr.A.S.Grewal, learned Additional Advocate General, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 4. In view of the nature of order which I propose to pass, there is no necessity to issue notice to respondent Nos.5 to 13 nor any counter reply from respondent Nos.1 to 4 is needed at this stage. The petitioners are said to have been illegally arrested, detained and given merciless beatings resulting into multiple injuries allegedly shown in the medico-legal report dated 9.11.2010 (Annexure P-1) as well as the photographs Annexure P-2 (Colly.) also. C.W.P.No .21013 of 2010 2 On this premise, the petitioners seek a direction for the protection of their lives and liberty and of their family members at the hands of respondent Nos.4 to 8, besides seeking a departmental action and registration of criminal case against the guilty police officials. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the material placed on record, though it may not be desirable or expedient for this Court to express any views on the merits of the case, however, prima-facie, the petitioners have made out a case which requires a fact finding enquiry by the police authorities. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of with a direction to the Commissioner of Police, Ludhiana, to take cognizance of the representation dated 13.11.2010 (Annexure P-3) said to have been made by the petitioners and/or treat this writ petition as a complaint-cum-representation on their behalf and hold a fact finding enquiry within a period of three months from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order. Suffice it to say that if any action is found to have been taken contrary to law, the consequential steps be taken forthwith. Suffice it to say that if the allegations made by the petitioners are found to be correct, they shall be entitled to seek compensation or any other remedial relief, as may be available to them in law. Dasti. November 26, 2010 (SURYA KANT) Mohinder JUDGE