A.K. Gupta v. State Of Union Territory Chandigarh And Another

CRM-M No.43417 of 2021 ...1...

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Sr.No.112 CRM-M No.43417 of 2021 Date of Decision: 14th October, 2021.

A.K.Gupta

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Union Territory, Chandigarh & Another

...Respondents

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

Present:

Mr. Edward Augustine George, Advocate, for the petitioner.

* * * * MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA, J.

(ORAL) After arguing for a while, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the instant petition, while submitting that so far as the prayer as made by the petitioner qua the protection of his life and liberty is concerned, he (petitioner) would be moving a fresh representation to respondent No.2-Senior Superintendent of Police, Chandigarh, exclusively praying therein for the said protection and as regards, the remaining relief as prayed for in this petition as well as in his representation Annexure P-1, the petitioner would be availing the appropriate efficacious remedy, as may be permissible to him under law, for this purpose. He further prays that the said respondent be directed to take appropriate action on the fresh representation of the petitioner within some specific time frame.

Mr. Anil Kumar Lamdharia, learned Additional Public SEEMA SHARMA 2021.10.14 18:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC

CRM-M No.43417 of 2021 ...2...

Prosecutor, UT, Chandigarh, who has appeared on behalf of both the respondents in this case in pursuance of the copies of the present petition having been sent to the respondent-UT in advance, has no objection to the above-said submission as well as the prayer as made by learned counsel for the petitioner.

Resultantly, the petition in hand stands dismissed for having been withdrawn, with a direction to respondent No.2 that in case, the petitioner moves any fresh representation to him specifically restricting his prayer therein to the protection of his life and liberty only, he shall look into the same and if the petitioner would be found to be genuinely deserving the said protection, then he would take appropriate action strictly in accordance with law, in the given set of facts and circumstances of the matter, preferably within a period of ten days. (MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA) JUDGE 14.10.2021.

seema Whether speaking/reasoned?

Yes Whether Reportable?

No SEEMA SHARMA 2021.10.14 18:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC