Gurpartap Singh v. Ravinder Kumar Bakshi

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH COCP No.3248 of 2016 Date of decision: 06.04.2017 Gurpartap Singh ..Petitioner

Versus

Ravinder Kumar Bakshi ..Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY

Present:

Mr. Tarun Jhatta, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Nilesh Bhardwaj, DAG, Punjab.

for the respondent.

*** Daya Chaudhary, J. (Oral) Learned State counsel has filed reply by way of an affidavit of respondent in the Court and the same is taken on record. He submits that in pursuance of order passed by this Court on 12.04.2016 in Criminal Misc. No. M-13076 of 2016, the representation of the petitioner has been considered and appropriate action has been taken within the specified period. Copy of the Kalandra and the letter, which has been conveyed, are also annexed with the reply.

Copy of all these documents has also been supplied to learned counsel for the petitioner.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that because of threat perception, the protection was required to be given to the petitioner but no action has been taken so far.

Neetu Rani 2017.04.17 12:04 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

COCP No.3248 of 2016 Since only direction was issued to consider the representation and to take decision in accordance with law and the same has been done, nothing remains in the present contempt petition. Disposed of accordingly.

However, in case, the petitioner is still aggrieved in any manner, he is at liberty to avail the appropriate remedy or to move representation to the concerned authority.

In case, such representation is moved within a period of two weeks, the respondent-authority is directed to consider the same and take necessary action in accordance with law.

06.04.2017 (DAYA CHAUDHARY) neetu JUDGE √ Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No √ Whether Reportable Yes/No Neetu Rani 2017.04.17 12:04 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh