BALKAR SINGH Vs. SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner filed the present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for a direction to the SSP and SHO to register an FIR against private respondents under Sections 354/376/323/506/511/148/149 IPC etc., with regard to an occurrence which had allegedly taken place on 17.1.2000 in respect of his grand daughter Swarna. It was alleged that on that day the accused had caught hold of her and had started stripping her and accused Devinder Singh kissed her and tried to rape her with the help of other accused forcibly, whereupon she raised hue and cry and on seeing the people coming, the accused ran away. It was alleged that the matter was reported to the Panchayat but the accused threatened to act in the same manner. It was further alleged that a complaint in this regard was given to the police but the police took no action against the accused and thereafter application dated 28.1.2000 was given to the SSP but no action was taken.

(2.) NOTICE of the petition was given to the respondents. Reply has been filed on behalf of respondents 1 and 2 in the form of affidavit by DSP City Rachhpal Singh. In the written reply, it has been alleged that on 18.1.2000 the petitioner had given an application levelling allegations against only Kuldip Singh respondent to the effect that he had urinated facing towards his grand daughter Swarna. No other allegations were made. In his subsequent application dated 28.1.2000 the petitioner had added the names of 4 other persons namely Gurmej Singh, Veer Chand, Sham Lal and Constable Devinder Singh and in the said application, the allegations regarding urinating by Kuldip Singh by facing towards his grand daughter were missing and it was also not mentioned that any attempt was made to rape Swarna. It was further alleged that in the present petition it has been alleged that the accused had caught hold of Swarna and had started stripping her and that Devinder Singh had kissed and tried to rape her with the help of other co-accused. All the three versions given by the petitioner were altogether different. It was further alleged that on 18.1.2000 an application was produced by the petitioner regarding the matter having been compromised between the parties, whereupon both the parties were called to the police station on 19.1.2000 and on that date the statements of various persons were recorded regarding the matter having been compromised and thereafter S.I. Harnek Singh, who was entrusted with the enquiry had submitted his report.