The High Court
Case Details
COCP-2635-2023 (O & M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA IN T AT CHANDIGAR UNJAB AND HARYANA IGARH 137 Jitesh Verm Verma COCP No.2635 of Date of decision : 635 of 2023 (O & M) sion :-06.08.2025 …..Petitioner Versus Mr. Sande Sandeep Sharma, Senior Superintend thers and others intendent of Police, Kapurthala …..Respondents CORAM: AM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDH NIDHI GUPTA Present:- Mr. Maninder Arora, Advocate w Mr. Harmeet Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. ocate with Mr. Manmeet Singh Teji, AAG P AAG Punjab. NIDHI GU GUPTA J. (Oral) Prayer in this petition is for is initiation of contempt proceedings edings against the respondent(s) for will willful disobedience of the order dated 16.10 16.10.2019 (Annexure P-1) passed by ed by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in CR CRM-M-51835-2018 titled as “Jites Jitesh Verma vs. State of Punjab and others” thers” vide which the said petition was
Decision
n was disposed of on the statement of learned arned counsel for the State, who, who, on instructions from ASI Gurwinderp inderpal Singh had submitted that t that the police had prepared a cancellation llation report on 02.7.2019 and the same e same will be presented before the Illaqa Magis Magistrate in due course. It is submitted by learned coun counsel for the petitioner that the order dated dated 16.10.2019 (Annexure P-1) 1) has been violated by the respondents ndents, as challan has been presented ented against the petitioner. It is contended th nded that a statement had been made by t de by the learned State Counsel that VIJAY ASIJA 2025.08.08 18.17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document COCP-2635-2023 (O & M) 2 cancellation llation report had been filed in the FIR e FIR. It is submitted that despite that, in cont n contravention of the statement of the l f the learned State Counsel, challan has been pre een presented against the petitioner. It is r. It is submitted that this constitutes violation of ion of the order dated 16.10.2019.Accor Accordingly prays that appropriate action be tak be taken against the respondents. Learned counsel for the Stat State, on instructions from ASI Darshan Sin an Singh refutes the submission of the the petitioner and submits that departmenta tmental enquiry has been initiated again against ASI Gurvinder Pal Singh, to enquire in uire into the matter. In this regard, learn , learned Counsel refers to para 6 of the Comp Compliance Affidavit of Smt. Va t. Vatsala Gupta, IPS, Senior Superintend intendent of Police, Kapurthala dated 03 ted 03.09.2024, wherein it is stated as follows : lows :- “xxx xxx xxx 6. That it was furthe rther recommended in the report that, by doing so ASI Gurwinderpal Singh so 577/Kapurthala has sh s shown carelessness and has shown negligence towa towards his duty, thus, it was recommended that Depa epartmental Inquiry be initiated against him. That agree greeing with the report of the Superintendent of Police, lice, Sub-Division Phagwara, the then Senior Superintend ntendent of Police, Kapurthala passed the Order vid vide No. 2561-64/PA dated 25.11.2019, whereby y Departmental Inquiry was initiated against ASI ASI Gurwinderpal Singh No. 577/Kapurthala as per P er PPR Rule No. 16.24 and the same was conducted by d by Sh. Davinder Singh, PPS, Deputy Superintendent ent of Police, Special Branch, Kapurthala. The copy o py of the Order vide No. 2561- 64/PA dated 25.11.201 Annexure R-1. .2019 is annexed herewith as xxx xxx xxx” VIJAY ASIJA 2025.08.08 18.17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document COCP-2635-2023 (O & M) 3 Learned counsel for the Stat e State further submits that the petitioner h oner had joined the investigation on 09 on 09.4.2024; and the challan has been filed filed against the petitioner on 10.9.20 0.9.2024; and the next date fixed before the l e the learned trial Court is 09.09.2025 .2025 for framing of charges. It is further sub r submitted that the respondents hav ts have utmost respect for every direction of ion of this Court; and even in the presen present case, there is no violation of the order da der dated 16.10.2019 made out. Heard. The petitioner had filed the C the CRM-M-51835-2018 titled as ‘Jitesh Verm h Verma versus State of Punjab and ot and others’ seeking cancellation of the FIR no IR no. 30 dated 17.2.2018, registered stered against him, under Section 506/34 IPC 4 IPC (Sec. 295 IPC added later), and 25 and 25/27/54/59 of the Arms Act, at Police Statio e Station, City Phagwara; and to lodge an dge an FIR against the respondents no. 6 to 9 to 9 therein. The said CRM-M-51835 1835-2018 was disposed of by this Court vide vide order dated 16.10.2019 (Annexure nexure P-1) on the statement made by the learn e learned State counsel on instructions fr ions from ASI Gurwinderpal Singh that Cancell ancellation Report had been prepared in ared in the matter on 02.7.2019 and the same w me will be presented before the Illaqa M a Magistrate in due course.It is the contenti ntention of the petitioner that presentati sentation of the challan against the petitioner in oner in the FIR No.30 dated 17.2.2018 .2018 after the above ‘undertaking’ given befor before this Court, amounts to violation lation of order dated 16.10.2019. I find no mer o merit whatsoever in the said contentio ntention. On 16.10.2019, this Court was merely erely apprised of the fact that a cancella ncellation report had been prepared in the FIR e FIR on 2.7.2019, which was to be o be presented before the Illaqa Magistrate strate in due course. The same can e cannot by any stretch of the imagination nation be construed as any ‘undertaking rtaking’ on part of the respondents. In any even y event, no such ‘undertaking’ can be giv given under law, as the power to accept or re reject the Cancellation Report is with is with the Illaqa Magistrate. VIJAY ASIJA 2025.08.08 18.17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document COCP-2635-2023 (O & M) 4 Even otherwise, there was no as no error in the information so supplied to ied to this Court on 16.10.2019 as it is a it is admitted fact on record that as per the in information received by the peti e petitioner under the Right to Information ation Act from the SHO, Police Station Station Phagwara vide Annexure P- 4, Cancellat ncellation Report was indeed approved b oved by the concerned authority on 02.7.2019 (m 9 (mentioned as 2.7.2018 in Annexure nexure P-4). Even further, as informed by learned counsel for the State, the petitione etitioner had joined investigation on 09.4 n 09.4.2024; and challan was filed against the st the petitioner on 10.9.2024; and the nd the next date fixed before the learned trial d trial Court is 09.09.2025 for framing o ing of charges. In view of the above, no furthe further direction is required to be issued in the in the matter. Hence, the present contempt peti pt petition is dismissed. Rule stands discharged. Pending application(s), if any, sh any, shall stand disposed of. August 06 Asija Vijay Asija 6, 2025 ( NIDHI GUPTA ) JUDGE Whether spe Whether Rep er Reportable Yes / No speaking/reasoned Yes / No VIJAY ASIJA 2025.08.08 18.17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document