PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT BAR ASSOCIATION CHANDIGARH THROUGH ITS SECRETARY. versus STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.

Citation: [1993] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 915 · Decided: 07-12-1993 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: KULDIP SINGH, S.C. AGRAWAL
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

-
"""" I • 
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT BAR ASSOCIATION 
A 
CHANDIGARH THROUGH ITS SECRETARY. 
v. 
STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS. 
DECEMBER 7, 1993 
B 
(KULDIP SINGH AND S.C. AGRAWAL, JJ.) 
Public Interest Litigation--Writ Jurisaiction--Constitutional Duties of 
the High Court.~igh Court not taking note of the controversy which shocked 
the bar of the region and pennitting the withdrawal of a Writ Petition which C 
sought an enquiry into the matter of the abduction of an Advocate and his 
family-View taken by it that the controversy raised in the Writ Petition was 
confined to the hardship caused to the litigating public by the strike '1y the 
Lawyers-Held not justified. 
A practising Advocate K, his wife and infant child upon a visit to a 
Police Station were missing and were feared killed, leading to unrest and 
strikes by the bar in Punjab. 'lbe Government rejected the demand of the 
D 
Bar setting up a judicial enquiry Jnto the occurrence. 'lbe High Court Bar 
Association thereafter held an enquiry and found the involvement.of the 
local police in the killing of the lawyer and his family. 'lbe Police recorded E 
a confession in which the detenue admitted the slaying of Kand his family 
family members. 
A Writ Petition in Public interest W!lS filed ·by a resident of Ambala 
seeking a Judicial enquiry by a inember of the higher judiciary in the State. F 
'Thereafter the Bar Association of the Punjab & Haryana and the Bar . 
Council of Punjab & Haryana were impleaded as parties and after taking 
affidavits on record after notice, the Division Bench of the Punjab & 
Haryana High Court admitted the Writ Petition and observing that the 
petition involved general public interest and importance, referred the 
matter to a Full Bench of the High Court. 'lbe Writ Petition was dismissed G 
as withdrawn after final hearing by the Full Bench. 'lbe Full Bench was of 
the view that the graveman of the Writ Petition was. the hardship caused 
to the litigating public by the strike by the lawyers and therefore was of 
the view that the admission of the Writ Petition by the Division Bench did 
not convert the petition into a public interest litigation. In this view of the H 
• 
915 
916 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [199:3J SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 
A 
matter the request of the Bar to keep the petition alive as the relief of 
judicial enquiry was being . sought by the Bar into the abduction and 
possible murder of the Advocate's family was rejected. Disposing of the 
appeals filed against the said judgment, this. Court 
Hf:LD : 1.1. The Full Bench of the High Court was not justified in 
B closing its eyes and ears to the controversy which had shocked the Bar in 
the region and should have directed an independent investigatioli/enquiry 
into the mysterious abduction and alleged murder of the Advocate and his 
family •. The High Court also failed to perform the duty entrusted to it 
under the Constitution. (925-F-G] 
c 
2. The CBI is directed to take up the investigation of the case and 
the Home Secretary Punjab, Senior Superintendent of Police Ropar and 
the concerned SHO are directed to provide all assistance to CBI. (926-B] 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 7243 of 
D 1993. 
E 
From the Judgment and Order dated 19.3.93 of the Punjab & 
Haryana High Court in C.W.P. No. 2376of1993. 
Rajinder Sachher and Ravindra Bana for the Appellant. 
G.K. Chatrath, Attorney General, Walia Assistant Attorney General, 
R.S. Suri, G.K. Bansal and Thinlay Topagay for the Respondents. 
The following Order of the Court was delivered : 
F 
Special leave granted. 
This appeal is a sequal to an unfortunate occurrence dated January 
25, 1993 wherein Kulwant _Singh, Advocate, practising at the District 
Courts, Ropar, his wife and a child aged about two years were alleged to 
have been abducted and murdered. The lawyer fraterD.ity in general and 
G the advocates practising at the High Court and the District Courts in the 
States of Punjab, Haryana and the Union Territory of Chandigarh were not 
satisfied with the police investigation. The Pun.jab and Haryana High Court 
Bar Association (Bar Association) demanded a judicial enquiry into the 
occurrence by a sitting Judge of the High Court or a District Judge or a 
, H Vigilance Judge belonging to the higher Judiciary. Their demand, ha~ 
~· . 
P & H BAR ASSN. v. STATE 
917 
not been acceded to the by State Government, the Bar Association went A 
on indefinite strike with effect from February 6, 1993. Later on, the D
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.