S. Ratnavel Pandian, J. - (1.) The above Special Leave Petition is preferred by the petitioners of whom petitioners Nos. 1 to 16 are members of the Legislative Assembly of Haryana and petitioners Nos. 17 to 19 are members of the Parliament. They all jointly filed a Civil Writ Petition No. 14500 of 1991 under Article 226 of the Contitution of India before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh seeking various reliefs, the main of which being to direct an investigation by Central Bureau of Investigation against Ch. Bhajan Lal on the basis of F.I.R. No. 372 of 1987 of Sadar Police Station, registered on the complaint of Dharam Pal, making serious allegations of corruption, misuse of authority etc. and for setting aside the order of the Magistrate discharging the accused, Ch. Bhajan Lal.
(2.) The High Court dismissed the petition by a brief order without going into the locus standi of the petitioners. The relevant portion of the impugned order is as follows : "3. The reasons disclosed in the writ petition and canvassed by the learned counsel for the petitioners broadly are, that respondent No. 2 being in the helm of affairs of State, there is a reasonable apprehension in the minds of the people that a fair and impartial investigation in the aforesaid F.I.R. is not expected, more so when respondent No. 2 in the earlier case has already refuted the allegations levelled against him in the affidavit filed by him before the Honble Supreme Court. It has been vehemently stressed by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the State Police Agency will not be in a position to hold free and fair investigation and on that account, the investigation should be conducted by the Central Bureau of Investigation. 4. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioners and having gone through the writ petition, we do not find any merit in the contentions, as in substance the prayer of the petitioner is to ask this court to pass an order which may have the effect of running directly counter to the judgment of the Honble Supreme Court as contained in the concluding paragraph of the judgment referred to above. Dismissed."
(3.) Hence this SLP.;