ORDER

1. Delay condoned.

2. Leave granted.

3. In a petition filed under Section 482 CrPC in the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, the appellant had prayed for a direction to the respondents to investigate the complaint dated 30-9-2003 lodged with the SSP, Batala and for taking action in accordance with law against the accused persons. The High Court disposed of the petition by a cryptic order which reads as follows:

"In view of the reply filed by Respondent 2 along with the report Annexure R-l, no direction is required to be issued to the petitioner. However, the petitioner is given liberty to avail his remedy of private complaint. Dismissed."

4. On a reading of the order the reasons which weighed with the High Court in dismissing the petition are not clear. There is also no apparent reason for making an observation that the petitioner shall be given liberty to file a private complaint. A reading of the reply filed by Respondent 2 Deputy Commissioner, Gurdaspur does not spell out in clear terms what action has been taken and proposed to be taken. The least the High Court should have done, in the circumstances of the case, was to pass a reasoned order.

5. After hearing the counsel f