Sonam v. Union Territory Chandigarh And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Sr.No.114 CRWP No.7175 of 2021 Date of Decision: 02.08.2021 Sonam

...Petitioner

Versus

Union Territory, Chandigarh and others

...Respondents

(Heard through Video-Conferencing) CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA

Present:

Ms. Jasneet Mehra, Advocate, for the petitioner.

* * * * MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA, J.

(ORAL) The petitioner herein seeks the relief of the issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing respondents No.2 and 3 to protect her life and liberty and property as well because she apprehends threat to the same at the hands of respondents No.4 to 6 and she also prays for issuing a direction to the said official respondents to personally look into her grievance by deciding her representation (Annexure P-1) and to take appropriate legal action against the afore-said private respondents.

Mr. Viranjeet Singh Mahal, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, U.T., Chandigarh, has joined the proceedings on behalf of respondents No.1 to 3 in this case, in pursuance of the copies of this petition having been sent to the respondent-UT in advance. However, at this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner NEETU RANI 2021.08.02 16:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC

CRWP No. 7175 of 2021 -2- .....

seeks permission to withdraw the instant petition while submitting that the petitioner would be moving a fresh representation to respondent No.2 exclusively seeking the relief qua the protection of her life and liberty therein and she prays that the said respondent be directed to look into and take appropriate action on the same, within some specific time frame.

Learned counsel appearing for the UT Chandigarh has no objection for the same.

Resultantly, the petition in hand stands dismissed for having been withdrawn with the observations that in case, the petitioner moves a fresh representation to respondent No.2-Senior Superintendent of Police, Chandigarh exclusively praying therein for the protection of her life and liberty only, then the said respondent shall look into the same and in case, the petitioner would be found to be genuinely deserving the protection of her life and liberty, then he would take appropriate action strictly in accordance with law, preferably within a period of one week. (MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA) JUDGE 02.08.2021 neetu Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether Reportable No NEETU RANI 2021.08.02 16:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC