Court On Its Own Motion v. State Of Punjab And Others
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Civil Writ Petition PIL No. 200 of 2024 (O&M) Date of Decision: 13.01.2025 Court on its own motion .....Petitioner versus State of Punjab and others .....Respondents
Present :
Mr. J.S. Gill, Addl. Advocate General, Punjab. Mr. Satya Pal Jain, Addl. Solicitor General of India, with Ms. Neha Sharma, Panel Counsel, UOI.
Mr. Amit Jhanji, Senior Standing Counsel, UT Chandigarh, with Mr. Jaivir S. Chandail, Addl. Standing Counsel, UT Chandigarh. Mr. Sumer Partap Singh, SSP, Security & Traffic, UT Chandigarh Mr. Pawan Girdhar, Addl. Advocate General, Haryana, with Ms. Manisha Chaudhary, IPS, Superintendent of Police, Anti Corruption Bureau, Haryana, Head of SIT. Mr. R.S. Cheema, Senior Advocate, with Mr. A.S. Cheema, Advocate, Mr. Satish Sharma, Advocate, and Mr. Prince Bharol, Advocate;
Mr. Vinod Ghai, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Arnav Ghai, Advocate;
Mr. R.S. Rai, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Anurag Arora, Advocate, and Mr. Saurabh Sharma, Advocate, for Punjab & Haryana High Court Bar Association. ****
cognizance of the matter was taken by this Court on the basis of a news item published on 22.09.2024 in newspaper "
" and
2 "!"#"
" of the incident, which happened on Sunday at Golden Temple, Amritsar, Punjab, when a miscreant pulled out the firearm of PSO of sitting Judge of this Court and committed suicide by shooting himself. 2.
In terms of the order dated 09.01.2025 passed by this Court, Senior Superintendent of Police, Security & Traffic, Union Territory, Chandigarh, is personally present. It is explained by him that a report dated 09.01.2025 regarding heightened threat perception to the learned Judge, which is marked as Annexure H, though ostensibly appears to be at variance to the earlier report, that threat perception continues till investigation is pending but the variance is an outcome of Chandigarh Administration being unaware of the investigation and the mindset of police personnel of Punjab State managing the personal security of the learned Judge. Thus, it is submitted that the contradiction is
"$ .
3.
This Court after due consideration accepts the contention of Senior Superintendent of Police, Security & Traffic, Union Territory, Chandigarh. 4.
Investigating Officer, namely, Ms. Manisha Chaudhary, IPS, Superintendent of Police, Anti Corruption Bureau, Haryana, who is entrusted with the investigation in three FIRs bearing No. 44 dated 23.09.2024, 117 dated 22.09.2024 and 118 dated 26.09.2024 informs that investigation in all the three FIRs is complete and the final report would be filed before the jurisdictional Magistrate/Court within a week.
5.
This Court afford liberty to the Investigating Officer Ms. Manisha Chaudhary, IPS, Superintendent of Police, Anti Corruption Bureau, Haryana, to file final reports in the aforesaid FIRs before the jurisdictional Magistrate/Court within a week.
3 6.
Considering the fact that this petition is pending for the last more than four months and threat perception experienced by the learned Judge may have lost its sting by afflux of time, this Court deems it appropriate not to keep this petition pending. Accordingly, this petition is disposed of by passing the following order:
i) Investigating Officer
Ms.
Manisha Chaudhary, IPS, Superintendent of Police, Anti Corruption Bureau, Haryana is directed to conclude investigation in FIRs No. 44 dated 23.09.2024, 117 dated 22.09.2024 and 118 dated 26.09.2024 at the earliest preferably within a period of one week by filing final reports before the jurisdictional Magistrate/Court. ii) The jurisdictional Magistrate/Court is free to consider the final reports by adopting the due process of law without being influenced by the orders passed in this petition and also the fact that the issue relates to the security of a sitting Judge of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana.
iii) As regards the personal security of the learned Judge is concerned, it is directed that the same be continued in the present status leaving it for the learned Judge to scale it down in line with threat perception experienced by the learned Judge by exercising his keen sense of judgement.
7.
With these observations, the petition stands disposed of. (SHEEL NAGU) CHIEF JUSTICE (SUDHIR SINGH) JUDGE 13.01.2025 ravinder Whether speaking/reasoned √Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No√