Pardeep Mittal v. State Of Haryana And Others

CWP-20051-2022 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-20051-2022 Date of decision:- 06.02.2026 Pardeep Mittal

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana and others

...Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUVIR SEHGAL Present:- Ms. Saloni Chhabra, Advocate, for the petitioner. Ms. Svaneel Jaswal, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. ...

SUVIR SEHGAL, J. (Oral) 1.

At the outset, counsel for the petitioner states that she does not have any instructions from petitioner.

2.

Primary prayer made in the petition is for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing respondent No.2 to decide complaint/ representation dated 04.06.2022, Annexure P-16, and to provide protection to petitioner as well as his family members as they are facing threat from respondent No.5, who is Sub Inspector with Haryana Police. Another prayer has been made for directing official respondents to register a criminal case against respondent No.5.

PARDEEP NAUTIYAL 2026.02.06 17:17 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

CWP-20051-2022 -23.

In deference to order dated 21.08.2025, passed by this Court, a compliance report by way of affidavit of Deputy Superintendent of Police, Ambala Cantt. District Ambala, has been filed on behalf of respondents, stating therein that complaint/representation, Annexure P-16, was enquired into and a report dated 05.10.2022, Annexure R-1, was submitted, wherein it was recorded that allegations levelled by the complainant regarding demand of bribe are based on falsehood. It has further recorded that complainant did not appear in enquiry despite being called upon to do so. As per compliance report, enquiry report has been approved by Additional Director General of Police, Ambala Division, Ambala Cantt, on 22.08.2022, Annexure R-2. A stand has been taken by official respondents that petitioner is a habitual offender and has been named as an accused in 15 to 20 cases on allegation of smuggling of liquor and he has filed complaint against respondent No.5 to exert pressure on the police.

4.

In view of above response filed by official respondents, this Court does not find any merit in the petition, which is dismissed. (SUVIR SEHGAL) JUDGE 06.02.2026 Pardeep Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No PARDEEP NAUTIYAL 2026.02.06 17:17 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment