IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. M. No.1694-M of 2011 Date of Decision:11.3.2011 Goldy and others .... Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and others .... Respondents CORAM: Hon'ble Ms. Justice Nirmaljit Kaur Present: Mr. Sandeep Arora, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. K.S. Pannu, D.A.G. Punjab. **** 1.Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers 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? NIRMALJIT KAUR, J.(Oral) The present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for issuance of direction to respondents No.2 to 3 to comply with the provisions of Section 160 Cr.P.C. in case presence of petitioners is required in connection with any investigation or enquiry as the petitioners are being unnecessarily harassed by respondent No.3 by calling them to the police station times and again. Reply has been filed on behalf of respondents No.1 to 3/State. As per the said reply, the petitioners are neither wanted in any Criminal case nor any case is pending against them. It is further submitted that the father of the petitioners is a proclaimed offender. Hence, respondent No.3 is raiding the house of the petitioners in order to arrest their father. However, in para-4 of the said reply, an undertaking is given that whenever the petitioners would be required in connection with the investigation of the case FIR No.116/2002 under Section 420/467/468/471/120-B IPC Police Station Beas District Amritsar (Rural), the provisions as enshrined under Crl. M. No.1694-M of 2011 -2- Section 160 Cr.P.C. shall be complied with. In view of the above, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to the investigating agency that in case the petitioners are required in the aforesaid FIR, Section 160 Cr.P.C. shall be strictly complied with. 11.3.2011 ( NIRMALJIT KAUR ) rajeev JUDGE