According to the complaint, Saraon and his family had sent several written representations to senior police officers between July 25 and August 9, 2024A 67-year-old resident of Sector 36-A has approached the Police Complaints Authority in Chandigarh, alleging collusion, manipulation of evidence and failure to follow legal procedures by officers of Chandigarh Police in connection with an alleged trespass linked to a family property dispute.In a detailed complaint submitted to the authority headed by Justice Kuldip Singh, the complainant, Swaranjit Singh Saraon, alleged that officials of Sector 36 Police Station ignored repeated warnings about a possible attack on his property and later failed to properly investigate the incident.According to the complaint, Saraon and his family had sent several written representations to senior police officers between July 25 and August 9, 2024, warning that certain relatives might attempt to forcibly take possession of his property and threaten his family. He alleged that despite these alerts, no preventive action was taken by the police.Saraon stated that on August 28, 2024, a group of people allegedly entered his property by jumping the gate and breaking locks. He claimed the group assaulted him and threatened his daughter with a hammer during the incident. A Police Control Room (PCR) team that reached the spot reportedly had to draw service weapons to control the situation.However, Saraon alleged that despite police presence during the incident, no FIR was registered immediately. Instead, a kalandra (Daily Diary Report No. 48) was prepared by a sub-inspector describing the episode as a “casual brawl”.According to the complaint, an FIR was registered only on September 13, 2024, nearly three weeks after the alleged incident and after repeated follow-ups by the family.The complainant has also raised concerns about the manner in which the investigation was conducted. He alleged that around 40 photographs documenting the assault and threats were not included in the case record and that key witnesses were omitted from the chargesheet. These witnesses allegedly include a PCR officer who reportedly drew his weapon during the incident and the officer who first recorded the police diary entry.Story continues below this adSaraon claimed that the investigating officer did not examine his daughter but still placed a statement in her name on record. He also alleged that his own detailed statement was replaced with a shorter version that omitted several allegations.The complaint also states that the police did not seek custody of the accused despite directions from the Punjab and Haryana High Court to expedite the investigation. Saraon alleged that one accused who had been arrested in the case was later allowed to leave for the United Kingdom without non-bailable warrants or proclamation proceedings being initiated.Saraon said he later obtained, through the Right to Information Act, an internal inquiry report, dated November 17, 2025, which had closed his earlier complaint against the station house officer without informing him. The report reportedly cited the matter being sub judice and described both sides as habitual complainants.In his latest representation, Saraon has sought a departmental inquiry or registration of an FIR against the police officers concerned and requested that the investigation be transferred to an independent agency. The complaint, supported by documents including police records, videos, RTI replies and court orders, is currently under examination by the Police Complaints Authority. © The Indian Express Pvt LtdTags:chandigarh