AMARNATH SAWAN MAL Vs. JOGINDER SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a petition under the Contempt of Courts Act praying that respondents-be suitably punished for having committed contempt of Court in the following circumstances. By my order dated 29-10-1959 I have discharged the rule against respondent No. 3 and at present there-is before me the case against the remaining two respondents -the first being Shri Joginder Singh. Inspector, C. I. A. , Staff,' Amritsar, and the second Shri Sunder Lal alias Sunder Das, S. I. , C. I. A-Staff, Amritsar.

(2.) THE petitioner has four sons. Sukhdev Raj, who was 18 years of age at the time of this incident, is the youngest. The petitioner's wife died on the night between 11th and 12th June 1959 and the customary obsequial rites had to l> e performed every day till 21st June 1959 which was fixed for the Kirya ceremony of the deceased. Sukhdev Raj was performing these rites every day. On 19th June 1959 according to the petitioner Sukhdev Raj was taken into custody at 4 p. m. by C. I. A. Staff, Amritsar. The petitioner on coming to know of this addressed the following telegram to the City Magistrate, Duty Magistrate, Deputy Commissioner and the Senior Superintendent of Police, Amritsar: "unfortunately I and my sons who are highly educated are against the evil of corruption from the last thirty five years. Corrupt officials in ordcr to wreak vengeance and to put undue pressure, harass and trouble us have been carrying on all sorts of nefarious activities. My wife died a week ago and my son Sukhdev Raj who is a social worker of the Congress Party has to perform all the death ceremonies of his mother. Tomorrow is a Dusherra ceremony and day-aftertomorrow Kirya. Some inimical persons in order to disrepute and trouble us have maliciously joined hands. The City Staff Police took my son in custody at 4 p. m. We fear of harsh and illegal treatment. We pray that Sukhdev Raj be ordered to be medically examined or yourself should be kind enough to inspect the body of Sukhdevraj. " On 21st June 1959 Shri Kewal Krishan, elder brother of Sukhdev Raj, who was employed as Secretary, Municipal Committee, Adampur, came to Amritsar in the morning and on learning of the arrest of Sukhdev Raj on 22nd June 1959 he presented an application to the Duty Magistrate (copy , of which is Ex. P-l) conveying his apprehension that he was going to be involved in a false case by the local police and requested that he be got produced in the Court and also got medically examined. The Duty Magistrate, Shri Sehgal, sent an order that Sukhdev Raj should be produced in his Court at 12 noon. Respondent Sunder Das submitted a report (vide Ex. P-6) to the effect that Sukhdev Raj is neither in custody in connection with any case nor is he with the police. Now it is alleged that this was a false report made by respondent Sunder Das, S. I. , and Sukhdev Raj was under wrongful and illegal confinement. On 22nd June 1959 the petitioner came to. Chandigarh and filed a petition under S. 491 Cr. P. C. , for the issue of directions in the nature of Habeas Corpus to S. Joginder Singh Inspector ,and Shri Sunder Das, S. I. , the two respondents. . The allegations were made that Sukhdev Raj had been beaten while in wrongful police custody. On 23rd June 1959 Redi, J. , issued notice and directed that Sukhdev Raj be produced in his Court on 6th July 1959. The petitioner on returning to Amritsar sent a telegram on 24th June 1959 to the Superintendent of Police, Deputy Commissioner and City Magistrate, and Duty Magistrate, Amritsar to the following effect:

(3.) AN affidavit which was sworn by respondent Sunder Das on 29th June was filed in the High Court in answer to the notice under S. 491, Cr. P. C. In that affidavit the respondent denied the allegations contained in the plaint and stated that Sukhdev Raj had not been taken into custody at 4 p. m. , on 19th June. At 6-30 p. m. , according to him Sukhdev Raj was joined in the investigation of a case (F. I. R. No. 63 dated 3rd May 1959 under S. 457/380 I. P. C,) involving theft of ornaments. He had been called at 6-30 p. m. and was permitted to leave for his house at S p. m. He was again joined in the investigation at 3-30 p. m. , on 20th June 1959 and he left the C. I. A. Staff premises at 5 p. m. Thereafter he absconded and despite search could not be found. He was arrested at 1 p. m. on 24th June 1959 and was produced for remand before the Ilaqa Magistrate Shri H. S. Kwatra, Magistrate 1st Class on 25th June 1959 and was remanded to police custody till 29th June 1959. The arrest of thy said Sukhdev Raj was made by Shiv Raj Singh, A. S. I. (R. W. 8) there being credible information with the police justifying his arrest. On 6th July 1959 the petition under S. 491, Cr. P. C. , was dismissed. In the meanwhile the petitioner had moved this Court under Contempt of Courts Act on 2nd July 1959, and notice was issued by Gosain J. , on 3rd July 1959. In answer to the notice issued to the respondents they filed affidavits in this Court. In his affidavit Sunder Das stated that on 19th June 1959 he joined Sukhdev Raj at 0-30 p. m. , in the investigation of a theft case and had permitted him to leave the staff at 8-30 p. m. , and that on 20th June 1959 he again joined Sukhdev Raj in the investigation of the case at 3-30 p. m. and permitted him to leave the office of C. I. A. staff at 5 p. m. with instructions to attend the office on the next day, i. e. , 21st June 1959, but he did not attend on 2ist June 1959 and absconded. On 21st June he had Instructed the members of the staff to remain on the look out and to arrest him. On 22nd June 1959 at 10 a. m. , he received a Robkar from the court of Shri B. P. Sehgal requiring him to produce Sukhdev Raj, but as he was not present, he made a report to that effect. It was also stated that a search was made for him from 21st June to 24th June, 1959. S. I. Shiv Raj Singh (R. W. 8) succeeded in locating him at 1 p. m. , in the Ram Bagh Gardens and he arrested him in the presence of Ch. Ram Singh and Ch. Mool Raj, two respectables of the locality.