IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Criminal Miscellaneous No. M-21975 of 2008 Date of Decision: December 02, 2008 Daljit Singh .....PETITIONER(S) VERSUS State of Punjab & Others .....RESPONDENT(S) . . . CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: - Mr. B.D. Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Shilesh Gupta, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. . . . AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral) This petition has been filed by the complainant of FIR No.207 dated 23.7.2008 under Sections 326, 323, 324, 506, 427, 34 IPC, Police Station, Sadar, Jalandhar, praying for directions to protect life and liberty of the petitioner. Reply by way of affidavit of Mr. Pawan Kumar Rai, IPS, Senior Superintendent of Police, Jalandhar, has been filed on behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 3. Learned counsel for the respondent- State, on instructions from Sarabjit Singh Rai, Inspector, has pointed out that investigation has been completed. Out of the five named accused, two Crl. Misc. No. M-21975 of 2008 [2] have been found to be guilty and final report would be filed before the concerned Court in due course. Learned counsel for the petitioner has pointed out that Para 16 and 17 of the affidavit filed by the Senior Superintendent of Police, Jalandhar, show that the concerned official who was required to effect arrest, had not done his duty which is an intentional omission on the part of the public servant who was bound to apprehend the accused. I have considered the issue. Para 16 and 17 of the affidavit sworn on 30.10.2008 indicates the following:- “16. That in reply to para No.16 of the petition, it is submitted that the application was filed by the petitioner. On his complaint I.O. was directed vide memo no.1776 dated 27-08-2008 to arrest the accused in the case. It is further submitted that both the accused in this case had already been arrested. 17. That in reply to para no.17, the answering respondent had directed the I.O. to arrest the accused, but as he had not do so, so he was placed under suspension vide order no.119373-79 dated 06-10-2008. However, both the accused in this case have already been arrested.” Learned counsel for the petitioner has also pointed out that material facts have been concealed in so much as by the time affidavit was sworn, the concerned official had already been reinstated. It is thus only an eye-wash so as to make this Court believe that appropriate action is being taken. It is the admitted case of Senior Superintendent of Police, Jalandhar, that directions Crl. Misc. No. M-21975 of 2008 [3] were issued to the investigating officer to effect the arrest of the accused. It is further the admitted case that needful was not done and therefore, departmental proceedings have been initiated. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, Senior Superintendent of Police, Jalandhar is directed to consider invoking of provisions of Section 221 IPC and to ensure that complete justice is done. Final report, after considering the issues involved, would be filed within 45 days from today before the concerned Court. Petitioner would be at liberty to file appropriate application before the concerned Magistrate in case he finds any lacuna in investigation. The petition is disposed of. (AJAI LAMBA) December 02, 2008 JUDGE avin