GURCHARAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking to set aside the second inquiry report dated 09.02.2017 (Annexure P-4) as well as to set aside all consequential proceedings arising therein.

(2.) In brief, the facts are that the petitioner complainant got FIR No. 57 dated 06.05.2016 under Section 304-B IPC registered at Police Station Nehianwala, District Bathinda against accused Sandeep Singh son of Jagseer Singh, Jagseer Singh s/o Surjeet Singh and Jaswinder Kaur w/o Jagseer Singh. It was alleged in the FIR that a marriage was solemnised between sister of the complainant with Sandeep Singh son of Jagseer Singh and at the time of marriage adequate dowry was given as per their status but the in-laws were not happy with the same and were demanding a car. The sister of the complainant was continuously harassed and she informed that her life has been made miserable on the ground that she was not bringing "Swift car" from her parents. Efforts had been made by the family members of the complainant to talk to the in-laws but to no avail. On 05.05.2016, the sister of the complainant Karamjeet Kaur (since deceased) called him up and said their in-laws are torturing her to bring Swift car and her life had been made miserable and hell. The complainant was informed on 06.05.2016 that his sister had committed suicide by hanging herself in her matrimonial home. The matter was investigated and at first the Investigating Agency arrested Sandeep Singh, husband of the deceased on 06.05.2016, whereas other accused, namely Jagseer Singh and Jaswinder Kaur managed to evade arrest. Thereafter, an application was moved on 11.05.2016 by the daughter of Jagseer Singh i.e. sister-in-law of the deceased and this application was registered vide no. 148/ Nehianwala/ 16 dated 12.05.2016 by S.S.P. (Investigation), Bathinda and was further marked to Superintendent of Police (D), Bathinda for inquiry report. The Investigating Agency, thereafter filed challan dated 22.8.2016 under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. against Sandeep Singh s/o Jagseer Singh while mentioning that father-in-law and mother-in-law are evading arrest and supplementary challan under Section 173(8) Cr.P.C. would be filed on their arrest. P.O. Proceedings were initiated against them. On the application filed by the daughter of the Jagseer Singh, a full-fledged inquiry was concluded by the S.P. (Investigation), Bathinda dated 15.9.2016, after taking into account the statements/ documents of both the parties and it was observed that charge under Section 304-B IPC had been rightly registered against the accused. That on 07.02.2017, another application was moved by Mandeep Kaur d/o Jagseer Singh before S.S.P. Bathinda for a second inquiry in the present FIR, which application stood allowed. The second inquiry held that no offence was made out against the father-in-law and the mother-in-law of the deceased.

(3.) The petitioner-complainant has instituted the instant petition arguing that after the matter had been investigated and charges had been framed, there was no occasion for a second application to have been entertained while further arguing that the second Inquiry Officer did not involve the complainant while concluding his report and had wrongly exonerated the accused Jagseer Singh and Jaswinder Kaur. it is also argued that a econd enquiry could not have been held in view of the circular issued by the office of the Director General of Police, Punjab, Chandigarh No. 10801/CR-LA-2 dated 24.05.2009