Jasvir Kaur v. State Of Punjab And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CRM-M No.50412 of 2024 (O&M) Date of Decision: 05.12.2024 Jasvir Kaur

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab and Others

...Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA

Present:

Ms. Renu Arora, Advocate for the petitioner (Through VC).

Ms. Swati Batra, DAG, Punjab.

**** ANOOP CHITKARA, J.

FIR No.

Dated Police Station Sections 09.09.2024 Division No.4, Jalandhar 109, 324, 3(5), 6(1) of BNS and 25, 54 and 59 of Arms Act Seeking directions to official respondents i.e. respondent Nos.3 to 7 not to harass the petitioner and her grand daughters and threaten to implicate the petitioner and her son in the FIR captioned above, the petitioner has come up before this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C., 1973.

2.

Counsel for the State on instructions has apprised this Court of their investigation and prima facie there is no reason to doubt such instructions. 3.

Faced with this, counsel for the petitioner seeks to withdraw the present petition with liberty to make a fresh representation and prayer for direction to the concerned Commissioner of Police to decide the same in a time bound manner and the same be decided by Commissioner of Police concerned.

4.

Let the petitioner represent afresh to the concerned Commissioner of Police, within two weeks from today. If the petitioner files a representation within the abovementioned time period of two weeks, then, the same shall be decided by the concerned Commissioner of Police, within two months, either herself or by authorizing and delegating it to any officer holding IPS cadre. It is clarified that such order must be a

reasoned order, and the same be communicated to the representationists as well as to her counsel without delay on their email IDs in case they mention the same in the fresh representation.

5.

Liberty reserved to the petitioner to file fresh petition or to take other legal remedies in accordance with the law.

6.

It is clarified that if any defamatory allegations are made in the representation then it shall be permissible for the concerned Officer to proceed against the petitioner. It is also clarified that there is no adjudication on merits and this order shall not come in the way if the interrogation of the petitioner is required in any cognizable case. It is further clarified that this order shall not be construed as order of stay of arrest of the petitioner in any case.

7.

There would be no need for a certified copy of this order, and any Advocate for the Petitioner and State can download this order and other relevant particulars from the official web page of this court and attest it to be a true copy. The concerned officer can also verify its authenticity and may download and use the downloaded copy for immediate use.

Petition is disposed of, as withdrawn. All pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. (ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE 05.12.2024 Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No.

Counsel for the petitioner submits that he is not pressing for any action on his pending representations and would be contented and satisfied if he be given liberty to make fresh representation and the same is decided in a time bound manner by passing a speaking order.