IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-6007-2025(O&M)

Date of decision :04.03.2025 LAKHVEER SINGH AND ANOTHER …Petitioners Versus STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS …Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSH BUNGER Present : Mr. Baldev S. Sidhu, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr. Navneet Singh, Sr. D.A.G., Punjab.

HARSH BUNGER, J. [ORAL]

Petitioners-Lakhveer Singh and Jagdev Singh, have filed the instant writ petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ in the nature of mandamus for directing the official respondents not to initiate any inquiry against them, which has already been done and finalized on the same matter by the District Collector, Malerkotla vide order dated 07.11.2024 (Annexure P-3).

2. Briefly, petitioners are the lambardars of Village RurkiKhurd. On 09.02.2024, respondent No.4-Amrik Singh submitted a complaint to the Deputy Commissioner, Malerkotla, alleging that the petitioners had refused to attest the Kursinama (pedigree table/family tree) of his father. It was further alleged that both the petitioners herein had demanded money for the attestation of Kursinama. It is submitted that the said complaint was enquired into and the Deputy Commissioner, Malerkotla, found the allegations made in the complaint to be false vide order dated 07.11.2024 (Annexure P-3).

2.1 It appears that respondent No.4 has submitted another complaint dated 25.11.2024 (Annexure P-4) before the Deputy Commissioner, Malerkotla, which has been forwarded by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Amargarh to the Tehsildar for enquiry and report, vide letter dated 28.01.2025 (Annexure P-5).

2.2 In the afore-mentioned circumstances, the petitioners have filed the instant writ petition before this Court, stating that they have already faced the enquiry and on the same set of allegations, another complaint has been filed against them, which amounts to double jeopardy.

3. Heard.

4. Apparently, an earlier complaint filed by respondent No.4 against the present petitioners was got enquired into by the Deputy Commissioner, Malerkotla and the same was closed/filed vide order dated

07.11.2024 (Annexure P-3).

4.1 It appears that respondent No.4 submitted another complaint dated 25.11.2024 (Annexure P-4) before the Deputy Commissioner, Malerkotla by claiming that earlier also, he has submitted one complaint, upon which, no action has been taken. The above-said second complaint dated 25.11.2024 (Annexure P-4) was marked to the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Amargarh, who has further issued a letter dated 28.01.2025 (Annexure P-5), the relevant extract of which reads as under :- “Subject :- Application regarding Lakhvir Singh (Lambardar) S/o Nahar Singh and Jagdev Singh (Lambardar) S/o Bant Singh R/o Village Rurki Khurd, Tehsil Amargarh, District Malerkotla.

Reference:- Regarding letter no.39/Peshi/DC dated 24-01-2025 from the office of the Deputy Commissioner Malerkotla.

On the subject cited above a application of Amrik Singh S/o Harpal Singh R/o Village Rurki Khurd has been received from the office of the Deputy Commissioner Malerkotla through above reference and Deputy Commissioner Malerkotla has instructed by sending a copy of the application that it may be made clear that the facts mentioned in the application are the same as mentioned in the earlier received complaint or not if the facts are different then a clear report be sent after inquiry. In the mean time applicants alongwith respectable appeared and told that the persons mentioned in the complaint were not given the chance to be heard (Copy of the complaint is attached) nor time was given to produce the proofs. Due to this they have given again an application dated

25-11-2024 to the Deputy Commissioner (Copy enclosed).

It is written to you while sending both the applications that the inquiry of the facts mentioned in the application be done by giving opportunity of being heard both the parties and the inquiry report be sent to this office.”

4.2 A perusal of the above extracte