Gurmit Singh Sandhu v. State Of Punjab And Others

CRWP No.10414 of 2024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CRWP No.10414 of 2024 Date of Decision: 28.10.2024 Gurmit Singh Sandhu

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab and Others

...Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA

Present:

Mr. Prikshit Thakur, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Swati Batra, DAG, Punjab.

**** ANOOP CHITKARA, J.

Apprehending threat to their life and liberty at the hands of the private respondent(s) and seeking directions to respondent No.2, the petitioner has come up before this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in the nature of mandamus.

2.

After arguing for some time, counsel for the petitioner submits that he would be contended and satisfied in case his representation dated 22.10.2024 (Annexure P-3) be decided in a time bound manner.

3.

Notices are served upon the official respondent(s) through the State's counsel. Given the nature of the order that this Court proposes to pass, neither the response of official respondent(s) nor the issuance of notices to the private respondent(s) is required. 4.

Let representation dated 22.10.2024 (Annexure P-3) be decided by the concerned Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP), within two months, either himself/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 representationist without delay. The concerned SSP to assess the threat perception pertaining to the petitioner and in case it is found to be true then protection be granted to the petitioner on the basis of day to day analysis for a period of one week. Thereafter, it shall be based on the decision/outcome of the representation as decided by respondent No.2-SSP concerned.

5.

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

Sonia Puri 2024.10.29 18:15 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRWP No.10414 of 2024 6.

It is clarified that there is no adjudication on merits. It is further clarified that this order shall not come in the way if the petitioners are required for interrogation in any cognizable 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 allowed to the extent mentioned above. All pending applications, if any, stand disposed.

(ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE 28.10.2024 Sonia Puri Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes Whether reportable:

No.

Sonia Puri 2024.10.29 18:15 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document