Amar Nath v. State Of Punjab And Others

CRWP No.10526 of 2021 ...1...

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Sr.No.259 CRWP No.10526 of 2021 Date of Decision: 19th July, 2022.

Amar Nath

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab & Others

...Respondents

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

Present:

Mr. G.S.Verma Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. Ramandeep Sandhu, Sr.DAG, Punjab, for respondents No.1 to 3.

Mr. Rajiv Joshi, Advocate, for respondents No.4 to 7.

* * * * MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA, J.

(ORAL) Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the instant petition, while submitting that so far as the relief as sought by the petitioner regarding the issuance of direction to the official respondents to register the criminal case against respondents No.6 & 7 and to get the entire matter enquired by some independent agency, is concerned, he (petitioner) would be resorting to 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 and liberty, he would be moving a fresh representation to respondent No.2-Commissioner of Police, Ludhiana, exclusively praying therein for the above-said protection only. He further prays that the said respondent be directed to look into and take appropriate SEEMA SHARMA 2022.07.19 18:41 I attest the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

CRWP No.10526 of 2021 ...2...

action on the fresh representation of the petitioner within some specific time frame.

Learned State counsel as well as learned counsel for respondents No.4 to 7, have 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 Resultantly, the petition in hand stands dismissed for having been withdrawn, with the direction to respondent No.2 that in case, the petitioner moves any fresh representation to him specifically restricting his prayer therein to the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 present matter, preferably within a period of two weeks.

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 19.07.2022.

seema Whether speaking/reasoned?

Yes Whether Reportable?

No SEEMA SHARMA 2022.07.19 18:41 I attest the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment