Balbir Singh Sarpanch v. State Of Punjab And ORS

In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh ......

Criminal Misc. No.M-26498 of 2017 .....

Date of decision:25.7.2017 Balbir Singh Sarpanch

...Petitioner

v.

State of Punjab and others

...Respondents

....

Coram:

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Inderjit Singh .....

Present:

Mr. Sukhjinder Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. .....

Inderjit Singh, J.

This petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for directing respondents No.2 and 3 to protect the life and liberty of the petitioner and also directing respondents No.4 to 12 not to interfere in the personal life and liberty of the petitioner. It has further been prayed for further directing respondents No.2 and 3 not to allow/let respondents No.4 to 12 or anybody else to interfere with the life and liberty of the petitioner. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the record.

The petitioner has already filed the representation dated 6.7.2017 (Annexure-P.6) to the Senior Superintendent of Police, District Hoshiarpur. As per the representation, the petitioner is Sarpanch of the village. There was some theft of `Khair' trees on the night of 10.6.2011. As per the representation these trees were found in the possession of Jagmohan Lal. As per the representation some persons whose names have been Harpal Singh Parmar 2017.07.27 17:03 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Cr. Misc. No.M-26498 of 2017 [2] mentioned in the representation are found to be the real thief and on 30.6.2017 those persons stopped him in the way and started abusing him and also threatened that if he made any complaint against them regarding theft of the `Khair' trees, then they will kill him. The complainant gave representation to the S.H.O. etc. It is also in the representation that the above said persons in order to harass him started filing false complaints against him before the Panchayat Officer by saying that the complainant was involved in the theft whereas he had not committed any such act of theft.

A perusal of the representation shows that the theft had taken place in the year 2011 i.e. more than six years back and no FIR or any representation has been filed against any person. A perusal of the representation no where shows that there is serious nature of threat to the petitioner for which security is required to be provided to him. Rather, it looks that the respondents have filed some application against the present petitioner before the Panchayat Officer. From the perusal of the record, I do not find any serious threat to the life and liberty of the present petitioner. Therefore, finding no merit in this petition, the same is dismissed.

July 25, 2017.

(Inderjit Singh) Judge *hsp* NOTE:

Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes Whether reportable:

No Harpal Singh Parmar 2017.07.27 17:03 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh