← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/16979/2016disposed of

Sheelo Bibi v. State Of Punjab & ORS

2016-05-17Mr. Justice Harinder Singh Sidhu2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CRM No.M-16979 of 2016 (O&M) Date of Decision: May 17, 2016 Sheelo Bibi

...Petitioner

VERSUS

State of Punjab and others

...Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJIT SINGH

Present:

Mr.Nakul Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner.

**** INDERJIT SINGH, J.

Petitioner has filed this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. against State of Punjab and other respondents for issuance of directions to respondents No.1 to 3 to provide adequate security for the protection of life and liberty of the petitioner from the hands of respondents No.4 to 9, who are openly threatening the petitioner and in connivance with each other, are forcibly trying to take possession of the land of petitioner, for which learned Civil Judge (Jr. Divn.) Guruharsahai has already granted status-quo vide order dated 17.03.2016.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the record.

From the record as well as from the arguments, I find that VINEET GULATI 2016.05.31 15:01 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

CRM No.M-16979 of 2016 -2the dispute between the parties is regarding ownership and possession of the land regarding which civil proceedings are pending and even stay order has also been passed by the civil Court. The perusal of representation Annexure P-4 given to SSP, Ferozepur nowhere shows that any threat was ever given by the private respondents to the petitioner nor they have ever attacked or caused any injury. It is simply stated that accused No.1 being Sarpanch has involved other members with him and he is violating the law by misusing his powers. It is also stated in this representation by the petitioner that she is a poor lady and nobody is hearing her. Keeping in view these averments, I find that there is no serious threat as alleged to the life and liberty of the petitioner. Therefore, finding no merit in the present petition, the same is dismissed.

May 17, 2016 (INDERJIT SINGH) Vgulati JUDGE VINEET GULATI 2016.05.31 15:01 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh