IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc.-M No.31927 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision: October 19, 2011 Smt.Labh Kaur ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab & others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH 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? Present: Mr.S.L.Chander Shekhar, Advocate, for the petitioner. ***** RANJIT SINGH, J. The petitioner has prayed for direction to register a case of cheating against respondent Nos.5 to 10. As per the averments made in the petition, the late husband of the petitioner was cultivating a land situated in village Lauhka for the last 50 years, which was shown in Abadi deh. It is alleged that respondent No.6, being Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat of the village, tampered with the Panchayat record and showed Khasra Nos.142 and 143 in the auction as Panchayat land and thereafter the Panchayat filed an eviction petition under Section 7 of the Punjab Village Common Land (Regulation) Act, 1961 before the District Development and Panchayat Officer-cum-Collector, Tarn Taran on the ground that the land is shamlat and belongs to the Gram Panchayat. As per the petitioner, no one had given the auction bid, but it was shown that this land was leased out to come fictitious persons. The Sarpanch is alleged to have tampered with the lease register and is stated to have been placed under suspension. Criminal Misc.-M No.31927 of 2011 (O&M) : 2 : It is further alleged that respondent Nos.5 to 10 had hatched a conspiracy by tampering with the lease register by entering these khasra numbers, but they could not produce the record of auction of this land. The petitioner has placed on record the affidavit of earlier Sarpanch, who was also produced before District Development and Panchayat Officer to point out that this land had never been auctioned by the Panchayat. Similarly, the petitioner refers to some other affidavits in this regard, which are placed on record. It is accordingly urged that respondent Nos.5 to 10 have cheated and defrauded the petitioner by tampering with the lease register. These are highly disputed facts being raised by the petitioner in this petition. The lease register was in the custody of the Sarpanch and the petitioner is in no position to be aware that any tampering has been done in the said register. The petitioner has also not placed on record any document to show how the lease register has been tampered with and how tampering of a lease register would lead to she being cheated. To my mind, no cognizable offence is revealed from the averments made in the petition. This appears to be a frivolous petition filed by the petitioner to get out of the affects of the eviction petition, which has been filed against her by the Gram Panchayat. The prayer in the petition apparently is frivolous and the petition is accordingly dismissed. Though I was inclined to dismiss this petition with exemplary costs but on the plea raised by the counsel that the petitioner is an old lady of 92 years old, I am not imposing any costs. October 19, 2011 ( RANJIT SINGH ) ramesh JUDGE