VIDYA STOKES Vs. STATE OF H P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has approached this Court seeking to quash First Information Reports as also investigations conducted and action taken thereupon, involving her therein, in connection with her alleged conduct as a General Secretary of the Himachal Pradesh Council for Chilf Welfare.

(2.) The petitioner is the widow of late Mr. Lal Chand Stokes, one of the three sons of Mr. Samuel Stokes, a pioneer in bringing apple revolution in Himachal Pradesh. It is her case that after the death of her husband, who was the member of Legislative Assembly from Teog, she in the year 1972 came in active politics. She and her husband as Congress candidates were always opposed from this constituency by one Mehar Singh Chauhan, who contested the election either as an independent candidate or a candidate of Bhartiya Janta Party (Bhartiya Jan Sangh) or as Janta Dal activist. It is alleged that Mehar Singh Chauhan belongs to Balsan area falling in Theog Assembly constituency and is married to the sister of respondent No. 2, who is the Director General of Police, Himachal Pradesh. Because of his close relations, both Mehar Singh Chauhan and respondent No. 2 nourished great grudge, feelings of enmity and hostility towards the petitioner. Mehar Singh Chauhan and respondent No. 2 had always worked against her and her husband.

(3.) After highlighting numerous instances of hostile attitude, it is alleged by the petitioner that in the year 1988, respondent No. 2 was transferred against his wishes to the centre. He was most unhappy in having left Himachal Pradesh. During this period, he remained posted in Jammu and Kashmir. With the change of Government, he managed to come back to Himachal Pradesh in the month of April 1990 and on joining he was appointed to the key post in the Police Department as the Director General. Respondent No. 2 always had the feelings that his transfer to Central Government was on account of the petitioner's wishes, as a result of this imaginary feeling, respondent No. 2 and other members of his family started harbouring even more feelings of enmity particularly after 1988. After coming back to Himachal Pradesh and joining as Director General of Police, Himachal Pradesh, respondent No. 2 started harassing the petitioner with the support of Bhartiya Janta Party Government, which was in power in Himachal Pradesh.