S P S RATHORE Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The challenge in this appeal is to the impugned judgment and order of the High Court directing the District Judge to conduct an enquiry to ascertain the truth of the averments made by Ashu Girhotra, respondent No. 5 in his affidavit dated 3rd December, 2001 to the effect that he was implicated in false criminal cases and harassed by the police at the instance of the appellant, a police officer.

(2.) The brief facts are as follows: A news report published in Chandigarh News Line dated 5th December, 2000 stated that between 6th September,1992 and 30th August, 1993 six first information reports were registered in police station, Panchkula in State of Haryana against Ashu Girothra, respondent No. 5, his friend Sandeep Verma, respondent No. 6 and Gajindra Singh in car theft cases. The police after investigation dropped the proceedings against respondent Nos.5 and 6 in two cases. The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Panchkula by order dated 30th April, 1997 discharged respondent Nos.5 and 6 in the aforementioned cases on the ground that there was no prima- facie material for framing charges against them. The news report also stated that the cases beared an uncanny coincidence that seemed to suggest that respondent No. 5 was systematically framed in the car theft cases by making him sign confessional statements.

(3.) The High Court on 8th December, 2000 took suo motu cognizance of the aforesaid news report and the judgment dated 30th April, 1997 delivered by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Panchkula discharging respondent Nos.5 and 6 in the aforementioned cases of car thefts. In its order dated 8th December, 2000, the High Court has observed that it seems the police officials posted at police station, Panchkula were let loose on respondent Nos.5 and 6 by the appellant, a senior police officer belonging to Indian Police Service, Haryana cadre in order to pressurize the sister of respondent No. 5 to withdraw the complaint lodged by her against him for the offences under Section 354 of Indian Penal Code. The Court issued notices to the appellant, State of Haryana and others calling upon them to show cause as to why they should not be burdened with compensation to be paid to respondent No. 5 for the harassment caused to him by falsely implicating him in car theft cases.