In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh ...... Criminal Misc. No.M-8058 of 2009 ..... Date of decision:23.3.2009 Nirmal Lal, Sarpanch .....Petitioner v. State of Punjab and others .....Respondents .... Present: Mr. Kehar Singh Hissowal, Advocate for the petitioner. ..... S.S. Saron, J. This petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (`Cr.P.C.' - for short) for directing the Police officials that they should not harass the petitioner at the behest of private respondents, who are accused in a case registered against them for the offences under Sections 306 and 34 IPC. It is submitted that one Ajit Singh of the Mohalla of the petitioner committed suicide on the intervening night of 30/31.10.2008. Kuldip Kaur, mother of the deceased came to the house of the petitioner, who is Sarpanch of the village. She informed that her son Ajit Singh had committed suicide by hanging himself from a tree at the railway station. The petitioner along with others and Kuldip Kaur went to the railway station and saw the dead body hanging from a tree. The statement of Kuldip Kaur, mother of the deceased was recorded and case under Sections 306 and 34 IPC was registered against the private respondents No.5, 6 and 7. The petitioner apprehends that at the behest of the accused in the said case Cr. Misc. No.M-8058 of 2009 [2] which is registered against respondents No.5 to 7, the Police is likely to harass him and Kuldip Kaur, who is a widow lady of 70 years and is being forced to compromise the matter. The petitioner is suffering only for the reason that he has supported the complainant who is a lady suffering due to the death of her son Ajit Singh. The petitioner has also submitted an application dated 28.1.2009 (Annexure-P.2) to the Director General of Police, Punjab, Chandigarh with copies to SP, Jalandhar, and I.G. Railway, Patiala, besides application dated 4.3.2009 (Annexure-P.3) has been submitted to D.I.G., G.R.P. Railway, Patiala. The primary grievance of the petitioner is that he has been harassed by respondent No.5 to 7 and that he is being pressurized to compromise the matter. The petitioner apprehends that on some false complaint of private respondents more pressure is likely to be exerted. After perusing the record and hearing learned counsel for the petitioner, it may be noticed that two applications (Annexures-P.2 and P.3) are stated to have already been submitted by the petitioner with regard to the grievances that he is facing. However, nothing has been shown as to in what manner the petitioner has been harassed or whether the applications (Annexures-P.2 and P.3) had indeed been submitted. In the circumstances, the present petition is disposed of with a direction that the petitioner may approach the Police authorities itself setting out his grievances. The criminal miscellaneous petition is accordingly disposed of. March 23, 2009. (S.S. Saron) Judge *hsp*