HARJINDER KAUR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

LAWS(P&H)-2012-8-86

HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

Decided on August 01,2012

HARJINDER KAUR Appellant

VERSUS

STATE OF PUNJAB Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) THE PRAYER: Instant petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for direction to respondent No.2 Commissioner of Police, Ludhiana to supply the outcome of representation dated 7.10.2011 (Annexure P-3) given by the petitioner and also for direction to conduct the DNA test of respondent No.3 Mann Singh Sarpanch (wrongly mentioned as respondent No.2 in the petition), petitioner and the daughter of the petitioner, in the interest of justice.
(2.) THE FACTS: The facts, as alleged in the petition, are that 12-13 years back, the petitioner was under the influence of respondent No.3 Mann Singh, Sarpanch of village Hawas, Rahon Road, Ludhiana. Respondent No.3 had developed illicit relations with petitioner which continued for many years and out of their illicit relationship a female child has born. It is also alleged that Sarpanch used to force the petitioner to have illicit relations with his friends. When the petitioner refused to have physical relations with him and his friends, respondent No.3 started black-mailing the petitioner and committing rape upon the petitioner in the year 2009 forcibly without her consent. Petitioner submitted representation to SSP, Ludhiana and to the Police Commissioner, Ludhiana but no action was taken. The petitioner filed Crl. Misc. No. M-3165 of 2010 wherein, vide order dated 27.10.2011, a direction was issued to decide the representation within two months. It is submitted that no proper investigation was carried out by the investigating agency, no blood grouping, DNA test of the petitioner, of daughter of the petitioner and of respondent No.3 has been conducted. Respondent No.3 is alleged to be an active member of the ruling Akali Dal Party and is the village Sarpanch, has considerable influence on the police. It is also alleged that one Major Singh, a close friend of respondent No.3 is also posted in the Police Station and has been helping the petitioner.
(3.) REPLY BY RESPONDENTS: Notice of motion was issued in this case. Respondent Nos.1 and 2 have filed reply and in the reply it is averred that during preliminary inquiry, allegations of the petitioner were found to be false. Hence, there was no question of conducting DNA test of respondent No.3. It is also alleged that proceedings under Section 182 IPC had been initiated against the petitioner. It is also mentioned that the petitioner has not come to the court with clean hands. The allegations have been levelled to wreak vengeance. Earlier, the petitioner had moved complaints against the panchayat members levelling allegation of demolishing her boundary walls. The said complaint was found false. Respondent No.3 was afforded adequate opportunities to file reply to the petition, but for the reasons best known to him he did not file reply, despite being represented by a Learned Counsel. I have heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record.;

Click here to view full judgement.