← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/2563/2016dismissed

Mewa Singh v. State Of Punjab & ORS

2016-01-25Mr. Justice Harinder Singh Sidhu2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CRM No.M-2563 of 2016(O&M) Date of Decision: January 25, 2016 Mewa Singh

...Petitioner

VERSUS

State of Punjab and others

...Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJIT SINGH

Present:

Mr.Randeep Singh Rana, Advocate for the petitioner.

**** INDERJIT SINGH, J.

Petitioner has filed this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for directing respondents No.1 to 3 to protect the life and liberty of the petitioner, who is feeling eminent danger at the hands of respondents No.4 to 8, those who are blackmailing him and his family members and also threatening with dire consequences and to falsely implicate him in a false and frivolous case as the respondents No.4 to 8 are influential persons and have close links with the local police and politicians.

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

From the record, I find that there is civil dispute between the parties and a civil suit is pending between them. The perusal of the petition nowhere shows that there is any threat to the life and VINEET GULATI 2016.02.01 10:14 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

CRM No.M-2563 of 2016 -2liberty of the petitioner. Rather, the perusal of the petition shows that petitioner alleges that private respondents have demolished the wall of the house and made a door in the street, which is adjoining to the house of the petitioner and made passage to the street illegally. As per the petition, the status quo order has already been passed by the civil Court. The only allegation is that petitioner is under apprehension that private respondents may cause bodily harm to him and his family members. Nothing has been mentioned or showed at the time of arguments as to when the private respondents have given threat to the petitioner. No date, month and year has been mentioned. Neither any place has been mentioned nor any particular regarding the threat has been given.

In view of the above discussion, I find that no case is made out for directing the official respondents to protect the petitioner from private respondents.

Therefore, finding no merit in the present petition, the same is dismissed.

January 25, 2016 (INDERJIT SINGH) Vgulati JUDGE VINEET GULATI 2016.02.01 10:14 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh