Raman Sharma v. State Of Punjab And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CWP-31454-2024 Date of Decision : January 21, 2025 RAMAN SHARMA -PETITIONER V/S STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS -RESPONDENTS

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP TIWARI

Present:

Mr. V.K. Sandhir, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Pardeep Bajaj, D.A.G., Punjab.

*** KULDEEP TIWARI, J. (ORAL) 1.

The prayer embodied in the instant writ petition appertains to issuance of directions upon the respondents to ensure protection of petitioner's life and liberty, and, to restore the security of the petitioner, which was withdrawn on 05.11.2024.

2.

Record reveals that, consequent upon the petitioner receiving threat calls and messages from different phone numbers (including socialmedia platforms), an FIR No.76 dated 04.10.2024, under Sections 308(4)/351(2) of the B.N.S., 2023, was registered at P.S. Mohkampura, District Police Commissionerate Amritsar, against unknown person(s). Moreover, the petitioner was also granted adequate security by police. During investigation of the FIR, the name of one Jobanpreet Singh surfaced as the accused, who extended threats to the petitioner, and therefore, he was arrested. During further investigation, it surfaced that accused Jobanpreet Singh has no link or connection with any antisocial elements and he is a first time offender.

DEVINDER YADAV 2025.01.23 09:38 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

CWP-31454-2024 3.

Post registration of the FIR and arrest of accused Jobanpreet Singh, the authority concerned re-evaluated the threat perception of the petitioner in view of the Standard Operating Procedure adopted by the State of Punjab and the Security Policy, and, concluded that as on date there is no threat to the petitioner. Therefore, the security provided to the petitioner was withdrawn.

4.

Taking into account the specific stand taken by the respondentState that, threat perception of the petitioner has already been re-evaluated, whereupon, it has been found that the petitioner does not have any threat as on date, therefore, this Court is of the view that no direction is required to be passed at this stage. However, the petitioner is always at liberty to, in case he apprehends any threat in future, approach the authority concerned by making representation, which shall be decided by the latter in view of the apposite Standard Operating Procedure and Security Policy. 5.

Disposed of accordingly.

(KULDEEP TIWARI) January 21, 2025 JUDGE devinder Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether Reportable :

Yes/No DEVINDER YADAV 2025.01.23 09:38 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment