Rakesh Khanna v. State Of Punjab And Others

CRWP No.7345 of 2022 ...1...

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Sr.No.126 CRWP No.7345 of 2022 Date of Decision: 01st August, 2022.

Rakesh Khanna

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab & Others

...Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA

Present:

Ms. Arti Kaur, Advocate, for the petitioners.

* * * MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA, J.

(ORAL) After arguing for a while, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that so far as the relief sought by the petitioner regarding the issuance of directions to respondent No.3 to conduct a fair and impartial inquiry in respect of his representation Annexure P-5 and to respondent No.2 to take action against respondent No.6 in view of his afore-said representation is concerned, he (petitioner) would avail the appropriate, alternative and efficacious remedy, as may be permissible to him under law, for this purpose and as regards his prayer qua the protection of his life, he would move a fresh representation to respondent No.2-Commissioner of Police, Ludhiana, exclusively praying therein for the said protection only and she further prays that the said respondent be directed to decide such fresh representation of the petitioner within some specific time frame and the instant petition may be disposed of accordingly. Mr. Sandeep Singh Deol, learned Deputy Advocate General, SEEMA SHARMA 2022.08.02 16:18 I attest the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

CRWP No.7345 of 2022 ...2...

Punjab, who has appeared on behalf of respondents No.1 to 4 in this case in pursuance of the copies of the present petition having been sent to the respondent-State in advance, has no objection to the above-discussed submission as well as the prayer as made by learned counsel for the petitioner.

Resultantly, the petition in hand stands disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2 that in case, the petitioner moves any fresh representation to him restricting his prayer therein to the protection of his life only, he shall look into the same and if the petitioner would be found to be genuinely deserving the said protection, then he shall take appropriate action, strictly in accordance with law, preferably within a period of 10 (ten) days.

It is further clarified that this order shall not be construed to be a shield to the petitioner against any action/proceedings already initiated or intended/contemplated to be initiated against him by any competent authority/person in view of the facts and circumstances of the present matter and permissible under any relevant provisions of law. (MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA) JUDGE 01.08.2022.

seema Whether speaking/reasoned?

Yes Whether Reportable?

No SEEMA SHARMA 2022.08.02 16:18 I attest the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment