Mohit Mehta v. State Of Punjab And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH.

CRWP-4973-2021 (O&M).

Decided on: June 28, 2021.

Mohit Mehta .. Petitioner

VERSUS

State of Punjab and others .. Respondents * * *

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JASGURPREET SINGH PURI * * * PRESENT Mr.Rajnish Gupta, Advocate, for the petitioner.

JASGURPREET SINGH PURI , J. (ORAL ) The present petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a suitable action against the private respondents for causing undue harassment and mental agony to the petitioner by making false complaints and thereby repeatedly calling the petitioner in the police station without advance notice. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the private respondents were working for the petitioner company and they had stolen the software and other study material from the academy and have committed fraud upon the petitioner. He has submitted that the petitioner represented to the police and gave complaints in this regard but no action

has been taken by the police. He has submitted that on the other hand, the police had been calling the petitioner to the police station and the petitioner is being harassed in front of the accused persons although there is no case against the petitioner and not only the petitioner but his father was also abused in the market with dire consequences of killing or false implication if the petitioner did not take the complaint back. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that the petitioner does not press the prayer with regard to complaint regarding theft of software and study material from the Academy, however, he confines his prayer only with regard to the protection of his life and liberty and the life and liberty of his family members. Notice of motion to respondent Nos.1 to 5 only at this stage.

Mr.Randhir Singh Thind, DAG, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of the aforesaid respondents and states that he has no objection in case prayer of the petitioner with regard to protection of his life and liberty is directed to be considered by the respondent No.3 in accordance with law After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, this Court is satisfied that since the petitioner himself has restricted the scope of his prayer only with regard to the protection of his life and liberty, even without calling for the reply from the State at this stage, this petition can be disposed of with appropriate directions.

Consequently, this petition is disposed of with a direction to the Senior Superintendent of Police, Patriala - respondent No.3, to consider the complaint of the petitioner confining the scope only to the

protection of his life. Respondent No.3 shall assess the threat perception of the petitioner and shall take appropriate action, if so required, in accordance with law.

It is made clear that the present order pertains only to the protection of life of the petitioner and does not in any manner reflect on the merits of the controversy inter se between the petitioner and the private respondents.

June 28, 2021, (JASGURPREET SINGH PURI) raj arora JUDGE Whether speaking / reasoned Yes / No Whether reportable Yes / No