Khem Raj v. State Of Punjab And ORS

CRWP-9295-2024 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRWP-9295-2024 Date of Decision: September 24, 2024 Khem Raj ......Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab and others ......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ

Present:

Mr.Shiv Partap Singh Khattra, Advocate for the petitioner.

........

RAJESH BHARDWAJ, J.(ORAL) 1.

Present petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for directing respondents No.2 and 3 to protect the life and liberty of the petitioner as private respondents in connivance with respondent No.4 have once attempted to kill the petitioner and now openly threatening to kill him. It is also prayed that despite having given many representations, no action has been taken against the private respondents and the life and liberty of the petitioner is still under threat. It is prayed that respondent No.2 be directed to take appropriate legal action against the private respondents or substantive decision on the representation of the petitioner, Annexure P-6, in a time bound manner. 2.

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner had been injured in the occurrence and his medical report is also there. He submits that he has filed representations before the respondents MEENU 2024.09.24 18:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRWP-9295-2024 -2alongwith the medical record, however, till date no action has been taken on the same. He relies on the law settled by Hon'ble Apex Court in Lalita Kumari vs Government of UP and others, 2014(2) SCC 1 in which it has been held that the official respondents must be directed to safeguard the life, liberty and property of the petitioner.

3.

Notice of motion to official respondents/State only. 4.

On asking of the Court, Mr.Tarun Aggarwal, Sr.DAG, Punjab, who is present in Court, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents/State. 5.

Without entering upon an exercise to evaluate the evidentiary value of the documents placed on the file, I dispose of the petition with a direction to respondent No.2-Senior Superintendent of Police, District Patiala, Punjab, to look into the representation (Annexure P-6) of the petitioner and decide the same expeditiously preferably within one month from today.

September 24, 2024 ( RAJESH BHARDWAJ ) meenuss JUDGE 1.

Whether speaking/reasoned ?

Yes/No 2.

Whether reportable ?

Yes/No MEENU 2024.09.24 18:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document