Surinder Singh v. State Of Ut Chd. And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRWP-8758-2025 (O&M) Date of decision: 18.08.2025 Surinder Singh

...Petitioner

Versus

State of U.T. Chd. and others

...Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE AARADHNA SAWHNEY Present :

Ms. Srishti S. Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Narender Kumar Vashisht, Addl. PP U.T. Chd. ***** AARADHNA SAWHNEY, J.(ORAL) 1.

Apprehending threat from respondent No.5, the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by petitioner praying therein to direct respondents No.2 and 3 to provide adequate security to him. It has further been prayed to direct official respondents to take legal action against respondent No.6 (ASI-Deepanshu), who as alleged is siding up with respondent No.5.

2.

In nutshell, the case as has been set up by petitioner is that he had been engaged by respondent No.5 (wrongly mentioned as respondent No.6) for renovating his residential premises i.e. House No.2326, Sector 44C, Chandigarh. Respondent No.5 had agreed to pay Rs.50 lakhs to him (petitioner), for executing the entire renovation work. Petitioner admits having received Rs.30 lakhs in advance and having completed approximately 50% of the assigned renovation work. It is further the case of petitioner that he invested Rs.3 lakhs from his own resources to procure raw material etc. However, even after completion of the entire work, respondent No.5 illegally withheld the balance payment. Petitioner has next alleged that HAMANT 2025.08.19 14:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

-2CRWP-8758-2025 (O&M) respondent No.6, a police official posted in Police Station, Sector-34, Chandigarh is also harassing him at the instance of respondent No.5. 3.

Notice of motion.

4.

Mr. Narender Kumar Vashisht, Addl. PP U.T., has appeared on behalf of the respondent-UT and has submitted that the complaint filed by the petitioner as also the cross-complaint filed by respondent No.5 was enquired into by the investigating agency. They were of the opinion that dispute is primarily civil in nature and has arisen out of the alleged breach of contract, thus, no criminal proceedings were initiated. The said report has also been placed on record.

5.

At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner wishes to withdraw the present petition seeking liberty to avail the alternate remedy so available to the petitioner, in accordance with law. 6.

Dismissed as withdrawn with liberty aforesaid. 7.

Petitioner can also take recourse to the redressal of his grievances through the Mediation process, if he so, deems appropriate. 8.

Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of. (AARADHNA SAWHNEY) JUDGE 18.08.2025 Hemant Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes / No Whether reportable :

Yes / No HAMANT 2025.08.19 14:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document