Sukhbir Singh v. State Of Punjab And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRWP NO. 5021 OF 2020 DATE OF DECISION : 20.07.2020 Sukhbir Singh

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab and others

...Respondents

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA Present :

Mr. J. P. Devgan, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. Harjasdeep Singh, DAG, Punjab.

(Presence marked through video conference).

ARUN MONGA, J.(ORAL) The petitioner is seeking issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus, directing the official respondents to protect the life and liberty of petitioner as he apprehends threat at the hands of private respondents No.5 to 8 and their accomplices.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that petitioner is a labourer. He along with his wife, one daughter and widow of his brother Dilbagh Singh and his children, is residing jointly in a house situated at village Cheema Kalan, Tehsil Patti, District Tarn Taran. Due to lockdown, government issued guidelines and directed everyone to stay at home. Respondents No.5 to 8 used to stand in front of the gate of petitioner. Petitioner requested them not to do so, upon which, they get annoyed. On 28.03.2020 at about 01.30 PM, private respondents armed with datar and other weapons, forcibly entered the house of petitioner and gave him a beating. When daughter of the petitioner SONU 2020.07.20 04:10 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

namely Ramandeep Kaur aged 17 years, came to the rescue of her father, respondent No.8 Malkeet Singh slapped her and committed obscene acts with her. The private respondents gave beatings to entire family and left the place of occurrence by giving threat to kill the petitioner and his family members. The petitioner received several injuries in the said occurrence and when his family members were on their way to Civil Hospital, Ghariyal, private respondents again chased them and tried to kill them due to which the petitioner and his family members came back without taking treatment. 3.

In these circumstances, the petitioner also submitted representation dated 21.05.2020 (Annexure P-1) to the police authorities, but the same have not been adverted till date. Hence, this petition. 4.

Heard.

5.

Without commenting on the merits of the petition and the averments contained therein, the writ petition is disposed of with an observation that respondent No.3- Senior Superintendent of Police, Tarn Taran to whom representation Annexure P-1 was submitted, would go through the contents of the representation along with the contents of present writ petition, by treating the same as supplementary representation and ascertain/verify the threat perception of the petitioner. If deemed appropriate, necessary steps then would be taken to protect the life and liberty of the petitioner. 6.

With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition stands disposed of.

(ARUN MONGA) JULY 20, 2020 JUDGE Shalini Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No SONU 2020.07.20 04:10 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document