LAWS(P&H)-2015-2-174

MANMEET SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.

Decided On February 23, 2015
MANMEET SINGH Appellant
V/S
State Of Haryana And Ors. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Honour killing-yet another instance

(2.) After the marriage with the petitioner, his wife was reported to have been taken way from his (petitioner's) company stealthily on 30.09.2014 when he had complained to the police listing out 11 names as prime suspects for causing abduction of his wife from his lawful company. No action has been taken till when the police woke up to the situation that the lady had been killed and dead body had been recovered on 02.10.2014. A case of death under Section 302 IPC and other related provisions was registered and the reply shows that 5 of 11 persons have been challaned, while the investigation is said to be still progressing and the police is on record to state that they have not collected any incriminating materials against the other 6 persons named in the petitioner's complaint.

(3.) The petitioner points out that there is simply no response in the whole of the reply filed by the State as to why there was no action taken between 30.09.2014 to 02.10.2014 against anyone of the 11 persons, pursuant to the complaint on 30.09.2014, which if it had been done, would not have resulted in loss of a precious life. The petitioner's counsel argues with passion that the cases of honour killing constitute a different genre, apart from mere offence under Section 302 IPC and the investigation must be entrusted with the high ranking official only to ensure that the investigating machinery is weaned from local influence and the persons of high responsibility carry out the investigation that could evoke public confidence. The counsel for the respondents would respond to these pleas by stating that the investigation has been taken up in right earnest and the Deputy Superintendent of Police is in-charge of the investigation and the police has not closed the case as regards 6 persons against whom allegations have been made by the petitioner. The counsel would also state that the petitioner has furnished no material to substantiate the involvement of other persons.