Ejaz Hussain v. State Of Haryana And Others

IN N THE HIGH COURT OF PUN NJAB & HARYANA AT ARH CHANDIGA CRWP N Date of D ssain o. 8626 of 2023 (O&M) Decision: 05.11.2024 Ejaz Hus State of H
  Present :





.....Petitioner versus Haryana and others .....Respondents   


  




  
 

   

 Mr. Naveen Sharma, Advoca ate, for the petitioner.

Mr. Deepak Sabharwal, Addl l. Advocate General, Haryana.

****

 
 
 

1.

This petition has been filed d by the petitioner by invoking g writ jurisd diction of this Court praying for the following reliefs:-
 

  

  



    

   

      

     

 

 

  

  

       

     

        



    

    

   

   

     

 

    

 

 !

!

   "   #  

 $ %    

  

  

    &'  $   



    

 

     (

         

    

 

        
)

 *

 + ,  , - -  

  

    

, ,    * )  .

.

& - 2.

Grievance of the petitioner r is that a part of Dargah is s standing o on the land owned by the petition ner. Though the petitioner has RAVINDER KUMAR 2024.11.06 16:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

 !"#" $#%#&'

[2] not filed any relevant revenue record or title deeds but the same may not be necessary since this Court is not going to decide the title of the land in question. The grievance thus is that safety, security, life and dignity of the petitioner has not been ensured by the official respondents. It is also informed by learned counsel for the petitioner that in regard to the said incident, an FIR No. 428 dated 03.08.2023 under Sections 147, 149, 153A and 427 of the Indian Penal Code has been registered at Police Station Pataudi, District Gurugram.

3.

In view of the above, it would not be appropriate to keep this petition pending any further and therefore, the same is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to apply before the concerned Superintendent of Police/District Magistrate of the area concerned for protection which prayer shall be considered and appropriate orders be passed in accordance with law. If the protection is due to the petitioner, the same be provided to him in accordance with law. In case, the authorities are of the view that no protection is due, then a speaking order be passed and communicated to the petitioner within a period of 20 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

4.

Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (SHEEL NAGU) CHIEF JUSTICE (ANIL KSHETARPAL) JUDGE 05.11.2024 ravinder Whether speaking/reasoned √Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No√ RAVINDER KUMAR 2024.11.06 16:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document