High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/14572/2013disposed of

Pritam Singh v. State Of Punjab And ORS

2015-03-02Mr. Justice P.B. Bajanthri2 pages

Cr.M.No.M-14572 of 2013 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Cr.M.No.M-14572 of 2013 (O&M) DATE OF DECISION : 2.3.2015 Pritam Singh PETITIONER

VERSUS

State of Punjab and others RESPONDENTS CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER

1. Whether reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to see the judgment ?

2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ?

3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest ? Present:- Shri A.S.Brar, Advocate for the petitioner.

Shri P.S.Paul, D.A.G. Punjab.

Shri B.S.Aulakh, Advocate for respondents 6 to 9. MAHESH GROVER, J.

The petitioner has filed the instant petition with a prayer that adequate protection be granted to him and that his life and liberty is endangered at the hands of the police officials namely ASI Amrik Singh (respondent No.5) as also respondents No.6 to 9. In para-11 of the petition, he has stated that ASI Amrik Singh at the behest of respondents 6 to 9 on a questionable motive has GHANSHYAM DASS 2015.03.04 10:57 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document high court chandigarh

Cr.M.No.M-14572 of 2013 -2abused the petitioner. He has also stated that ASI Amrik Singh is not looking into the complaints made by the petitioner regarding threat and interference to his property impartially.

The respondents have filed a reply and stated that there is no apprehension of the kind alleged by the petitioner. ASI Amrik Singh has also filed reply to deny the allegations made against him.

I have considered the matter and have also gone through the essential reason for the dispute between the petitioner and respondents 6 to 9 which seemingly centres around interference by the said respondents in the peaceful possession of the land of the petitioner.

There is nothing on record to suggest that the petitioner has taken recourse to any proceedings to protect his possession. In any case, he would be at liberty to do so as such matters are evidently in the domain of the Civil Court. In so far as the allegations by the petitioner regarding threat to his life are concerned, the official respondents have denied any such apprehension. In any eventuality, this would also be in the domain of the official respondents who would be free to evaluate the threat perception to the petitioner in the event of his making any complaint in this regard.

Since at this stage, the allegations made by the petitioner have been found to be unsubstantiated, the petition is disposed of with a direction to the official respondents that in case the petitioner approaches them with a specific instance of abuse or threat to his possession, they may look into such a grievance expeditiously.

(MAHESH GROVER) March 2, 2015 JUDGE GD GHANSHYAM DASS 2015.03.04 10:57 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document high court chandigarh