JASPAL SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. filed by the petitioners, seeking transfer of the investigation in FIR No. 28 dated 24.12.1997 under Sections 364/498-A, IPC registered in PS Sangat, District Bathinda to the CBI, as the case pertains to the disappearance of Balbir Kaur, daughter of petitioner No. 1, who had disappeared in mysterious circumstances, shortly after marriage.

(2.) IN the petition it was alleged that Balbir Kaur, daughter of petitioner No. 1, was married to Jagtar Singh, respondent No. 5 on 11.10.1997 and she was aged 22 years at that time and that sufficient amount was spent on the said marriage. It was alleged that shortly after marriage, her in-laws started harassing her for bringing more dowry and she was subjected to humiliation by her in-laws and that after one month of her marriage, she contacted petitioner No. 1 and told him that she may be sent to a far off place or may even be killed. It was alleged that subsequently Balbir Kaur telephoned in the neighborhood of petitioner No. 1 and left message that someone should talk to her, whereupon Avtar Singh talked to her on telephone from his village, at the house of her in-laws and at that time she told him that she was harassed by Jagtar Singh and other members of the family and she asked him that she should be taken home from there immediately. It was alleged that thereupon Smt. Balbir Kaur was brought from Village Pathrala and at that time, petitioner No. 1 was told that her in-laws were demanding Rs. 1 lac. It was further alleged that on 15.12.1997, respondent No. 5 came to Village Sanghera and wanted to take back Balbir Kaur with him to Village Pathrala Kalan and he took her with him on 15.12.1997. It was alleged that on 20.12.1997, Balbir Kaur, Nasib Kaur and Jagtar Singh went to Rama Mandi from where they took Paramjit Kaur to Village Ram Tirth and in front of the entire family, Nasib Kaur disclosed that Jagtar Singh wanted to take Balbir Kaur to Delhi and she expressed her apprehension that something wrong any not occur at Delhi. It was alleged that on 22.12.1997, Gurmit Singh came and told petitioner No. 1 that his daughter had come back to the village, whereupon on 23.12.1997 petitioner No. 1 alongwith Kirpal Singh went to Village Pathrala Kalan to inquire about the well being of his daughter Balbir Kaur and met Nasib Kaur (mother-in-law), who told him that Balbir Kaur had left for Village Sanghera on the evening of 21.12.1997, whereupon he contacted his family members but the whereabouts of Balbir Kaur were not known. It was alleged that thereupon petitioner No. 1 alongwith Kirpal Singh went to PS Sangat and they lodged aforesaid FIR No. 23 dated 24.12.1997 under Sections 364/498-A, 34 IPC, copy Annexure P1. It was alleged that uptil now the challan had not been presented in the aforesaid FIR and all the accused had been given the concession of bail. It was alleged that considering the facts of the case, investigation of the case should be handed over to CBI, considering that it was a case of disappearance of Smt. Balbir Kaur within 2 months of her marriage.

(3.) ON the last date of hearing i.e. 30.10.2001, considering that the reply filed by the Shri Harnek Singh Sran, SSP, Bhatinda was filed more than 2 years back and neither side was aware about the latest position, it was directed that the State shall file status report and that the I.O. alongwith Police file shall be present in court. In pursuance of these directions, SI Manjit Singh, SHO came present alongwith police file. Status report was also filed by Shri Bhupinder Singh DSP (R), Bathinda.