Jyoti Ghugtyal And Another v. State Of Punjab And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRWP-5694-2026 (O&M) DECIDED ON: 25.05.2026 JYOTI GHUGTYAL AND ANOTHER .....PETITIONERS

VERSUS

STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS .....RESPONDENTS

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH.

Present:

Mr. Mohan Singh Rana, Advocate, for the petitioners.

Mr. Neeraj Madaan, Sr. DAG, Punjab.

SANJAY VASHISTH , J (ORAL) 1.

Present petition has been filed by the petitioners, seeking issuance of direction to the official respondents, to protect their life and liberty from the hands of private respondents. 2.

On 14.05.2026, following order was passed by this Court:- "Both petitioners and private respondents No.4 to 8 (family members of petitioner No.1-Jyoti Ghugtyal) are primarily residents of Kaihargaon Syalde, District Almoda (Uttarakhand).

Therefore, the first issue which arises for consideration is whether or not present petition is maintainable before this Court?

Let credentials of both the petitioners and their permanent place of abode and since when both of them are living at the given address be verified and reported to the Court.

A copy of the complete paperbook along with the documents appended thereto be supplied to learned State counsel.

List on 25.05.2026."

3.

Today, learned State counsel has filed short reply in the Court today and the same is taken on record.

LAVISHA 2026.05.25 17:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC, Chandigarh

CRWP-5694-2026 (O&M) -24.

Learned State counsel submits that, as per verification conducted, both the petitioners were not found residing at the addresses mentioned in the present petition in the State of Punjab. It is stated that the address at SAS Nagar (Mohali) was found to be rented out to one Somdev.

It is further submitted that, in respect of petitioner No.2 namely Himanshu Manral, FIR No. 404 dated 14.05.2026 under Section 140(3) of BNS stands registered at Police Station Kotwali Jwalapur, District Haridwar.

5.

It is noticed that petitioners have approached this Court seeking protective orders, whereas such a plea ought to have been raised before the competent court at the place where they ordinarily reside and where they apprehend threat to their life and liberty. Moreover, this Court lacks jurisdiction to entertain the present petition in the manner sought by the petitioners. Accordingly, present petition is dismissed. (SANJAY VASHISTH) 25.05.2026 JUDGE Lavisha Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No LAVISHA 2026.05.25 17:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC, Chandigarh