SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2005 Supreme(SC) 81

Supreme Court Of India
P. VENKATARAMA REDDI AND A.K. MATHUR, JJ.
MANJIT KAUR - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS - Respondents
9 Criminal Appeal No. 303 of 2005,
Decided on February 14, 2005

Headnote:

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 482 - Petition seeking investigation- Direction sought to the respondents to investigate the complaint dated 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- The reasons which weighed with the High Court in dismissing the petition were not clear- There was no apparent reason for making an observation that the petitioner shall be given liberty to file a private complaint- Therefore the order of the High Court set aside and the matter remitted back to the High Court for fresh consideratio. [Paras 4 and 5 ]

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 for the parties, we consider it just and proper to set aside the impugned order of the High Court and remit the matter to the High Court for fresh disposal of Criminal Misc. Petition No. 59048-M of 2003. The High Court shall pass a reasoned order as expeditiously as possible.

6. The appeal is disposed of accordingly.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top