IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc.-M No.36821 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision: December 06, 2011 Joginder Singh ...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.Harinder Singh, Advocate, for Mr.Sanjeev Kumar Bawa, Advocate, for the petitioner. ***** RANJIT SINGH, J. The petitioner makes allegations that respondent Nos.4 and 5 came in Scorpio Vehicle and snatched some money from him. No action is being taken for this despite the fact that the petitioner has filed a complaint before the Magistrate. The complaint filed before the Magistrate has been perused by me. That is not a proper format of a complaint in case the petitioner wants any action to be taken against them for criminal liability. The petitioner has allegedly invoked the jurisdiction of the Magistrate, but he has to file a proper complaint. No case for issuing any direction is made out. Dismissed. The petitioner would be at liberty to file a complaint before the Magistrate in case no action is being taken on the complaint lodged with the police. This will be in tune with the law laid down in Sakiri Vasu Versus State of U.P. and others, 2008(1) RCR (Criminal) 392. December 06, 2011 ( RANJIT SINGH ) ramesh JUDGE