In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh Crl. Misc. No. M- 25930 of 2008 Date of Decision:March 17, 2009 Shanti Devi ---Petitioner versus State of Punjab and others ---Respondent Coram: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA *** Present: Mr. Damanjit Singh,Advocate, Mr. Sukhjit Singh, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Aman Deep Singh Rai, AAG, Punjab None for respondents No. 4 to 8 *** SABINA, J. Petitioner has filed this petition under Section 4823 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking direction to respondents No. 2 and 3 to conduct fair and impartial investigation in FIR No. 66 dated 28.4.2008 under Sections 302, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code(hereinafter referred to as “IPC”) registered at police station Dakha District Ludhiana. Petitioner has averred that on 4.11.2007 in the after noon, respondents No. 4 to 8 came to her house and took away her son Amarjit Sharma with them on the pretext of gambling due to Diwali festival on 5.11.2007. In the morning two persons came to the residence of the petitioner and told her that Amarjit Sharma had died. Petitioner rushed to Crl. Misc. No. M- 25930 of 2008 -2- the spot and found the dead body of her son. After making an enquiry it was found by the petitioner and family members that an altercation had occurred between the deceased and respondents No. 4 to 8. Due to this reason, respondents No. 4 to 8 had committed murder of Amarjit Sharma and had also took away his gold chain, gold ring, mobile phone and cash of Rs. 10,000/-. As per postmortem report, Amarjit Sharma had died due to multiple injuries. The matter was reported to the police but no action was taken by it. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that despite registration of FIR against respondents No. 4 to 8, police has failed to hold fair and proper enquiry into the matter. Learned State counsel has submitted that the matter has been enquired into by S.P. City (III),Ludhiana and he found that there was no solid incriminating evidence found against respondents No. 4 to 8 during investigation of the case, which was conducted by SHO , Police Station Dakha. The said enquiry was approved by Deputy Superintendent of Police (H), Ludhiana. Learned State counsel has further submitted that now a cancellation report was proposed to be filed as no incriminating evidence could be collected during enquiry against respondents No. 4 to 6. Since cancellation report is sought to be filed after eqnuiry, the petitioner would be at liberty to challenge the same by filing a protest petition. In these circumstances, no further action is called for . Accordingly, this petition is dismissed. (SABINA) JUDGE March 17, 2009 PARAMJIT