Criminal Misc.No.30255 M of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc.M. No. 30255 of 2011 Date of Decision : October 4, 2011 Veer Singh ...Petitioner Versus The State of Punjab and others ...Respondents CORAM; HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ALOK SINGH 1. Whether Reporters of local news papers may be allowed to see judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present: Mr. Surinder Gandhi, Advocate for the petitioner. Alok Singh, J. (Oral) Present petition is filed by the petitioner stating that on 28.9.2011 at about 5.00 pm Incharge Police Chowki Kang along with six other police personnel raided the house of Avtar Singh and forcibly abducted Avtar Singh, Wazir Singh and the petitioner and took all of them to the Police Chowki, Kang and confined them in the lock up of the police station; when Kashmir Kaur and Joginder Kaur wives visited the police station to enquire that Avtar Singh, Wazir Singh and petitioner have been taken to the police station, the Police Chowki Incharge demanded ransom of Rs.2.00 lacs to release them; the Chowki Incharge first demanded Rs.2.00 lacs and thereafter said that these are “Chuhrey, Kuttey Bhukhay Nang” and will have no money to pay now, therefore, take their thumb impression on the paper writing that they will arrange Rs.2.00 lacs and pay the same latest by 3.10.11 otherwise they will be abducted again; they were released us at around 11.30 in the night after taking their thumb impression on the papers that they will pay the money by 3.10.11; the petitioners and his poor relative Avtar Singh and Wazir Criminal Misc.No.30255 M of 2011 2 Singh have not such a huge money of Rs.2.00 lacs to pay to the police as ransom and they are fearing that they will be again forcibly abducted and put behind the bars in the police station and will be abused; there is an apprehension in the mind of the petitioner and his relatives that the Incharge Police post, Kang can register a false case against them; they also fear danger to their life and liberty from the protector of the law and they have also apprehension in their mind that Incharge Police post, Kang can eliminate them in the false police encounter. On being asked as to whether any application or criminal complaint was moved before the learned Magistrate under Section 156 (3) or under Section 200 of Cr.PC regarding the so called abduction by the police personnel, learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently argued that without moving such complaint or application, this Court is competent to issue direction to decide the representation. Since petitioner has efficacious remedy either to move application under Section 156 (3) or private complaint under Section 200 complaining about the illegal abduction by the police personnel, I am not inclined to invoke my writ jurisdiction. Dismissed. (Alok Singh) October 4, 2011 Judge BB