Balbir Singh And ORS v. State Of Punjab And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH Date of Decision:-20.10.2023 Balbir Singh and others ......Petitioners

Versus

State of Punjab and others ......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK JAIN ****

Present:

Mr. Sherry K. Singla, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Siddharth Attri, AAG, Punjab.

**** ALOK JAIN, J. (Oral) 1.

The present petition has been filed inter alia seeking protection of life and liberty of the petitioners at the hands of private respondents No. 7 to 14 and it is alleged that the petitioners are being harassed and are being extended threats to their life and liberty. 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that there are disputes going on between the petitioners and various respondents, whereby, petitioners have to make some payments to the respondents for which civil suits are also filed. He has also submitted that he is being threatened by respondents No. 7 & 8 armed with weapons to not contest the civil suits by admitting to their claims.

3.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners at length and perused the paper book. The photographs annexed with the petition clearly demonstrate that the respondents are peacefully holding dharnas against the petitioners for the financial frauds committed by them and therefore, they are wanting justice. There is nothing coming forth except for bald statements made by the petitioners that respondents are threatening them with weapons.

4.

Admittedly, the respondents are also commission agents of the same mandi and there seems to be a civil/monetary dispute between the parties, which the petitioners are apparently not ready to settle, as they are denying their claims. The matter is absolutely civil in nature and the alleged threat perception detailed in the representations (Annexures P-4 to P-7) are only out of the own whims and fancies of the petitioners. Also, there is no date mentioned as to when did this incident take place. 5.

The representations are also silent qua the same and the only date mentioned is with regard to the holding of illegal dharnas/protest in front of the house of the petitioners.

6.

Apparently, the petitioners and respondents are prudent businessman and have monetary dispute and there is no threat perception to the petitioners.

7.

In light of the above, the present petition is devoid of any merit and only an abuse of process of law to exert pressure on the respondents, who are apparently claiming their dues.

8.

In light of the above, the present petition stands dismissed. 9.

However, the State is duty bound to protect the life and liberty

of all its citizens and maintain the peace and harmony in the society and respondent No. 5 shall look into the same that no untoward incident take place. However, this order shall not be construed as any protection against law to the petitioners.

(ALOK JAIN) JUDGE October 20, 2023 Parul Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No Whether Reportable:- Yes/No