Priya Saklani and Another Vs the State of Hp and Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA

CWP No.7348 of 2026

Decided on: 12.05.2026

_________________________________________________________________ Dr. Priya Saklani and Anr. ....Petitioners Versus State of H.P. & Ors …Respondents ________________________________________________________________ Coram_

¶5

Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua

¶6

1 Whether approved for reporting?

¶7

_________________________ For the petitioners:	________________________________________ Mr. Jeevan Kumar, Advocate.
For the respondents:	Mr. Sikandar Bhusha, Deputy Advocate General for respondents No. 1 to 6.

¶8

Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge

¶9

Notice is confined to respondents No. 1 to 6, which is waived by Mr. Sikandar Bhushan, learned Deputy Advocate General.

¶10

2. This writ petition has been filed for grant of following substantive reliefs:-

¶11

1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes

¶12

2 -

¶13

“1. Issue writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writs, orders, or directions directing the Official Respondents (Respondent Nos. 2 to 4) to immediately register a formal First Information Report (FIR) against the Private Respondents (Respondent Nos. 7 to 17) based on the complaints 2026 dated 16.03.2026, 19.03.2026, and 06.04.2026 (Annexures P-3, P-4, and P-6).

¶14

ii) Issue writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writs, orders, or directions directing the Official Respondents to provide Police Protection to the Petitioners and the members of the Earth Healers Foundation, ensuring their safety from the private respondents and the mobilized mob.

¶15

iii) Issue writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writs, orders, or directions directing an independent and fair investigation, preferably by a specialized agency or a high-ranking officer not below the rank of SP, into the drug trafficking nexus (Chitta) and the involvement of the private respondents

¶16

iv) Issue writ of prohibition or any other appropriate writs, orders, or restraining the Private Respondents from interfering in the

¶17

3 -

¶18

peaceful functioning of the Petitioner-NGO or approaching within 500 meters of the Petitioners' residence and office.”

¶19

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that

¶20

after the filing of the writ petition, respondents No. 2 to 4 have registered an FIR. Learned counsel submits that petitioners have certain surviving issues with respect to the faulty registration of FIR and leaving out certain provisions of law therefrom, therefore, petitioners reserve their right to take appropriate recourse to law for the redressal of their grievances qua those aspects. Learned counsel for the petitioners seeks police protection for the petitioners. According to the learned counsel, petitioners have represented previously also to the Superintendent of Police, Solan and other Higher Authorities, inter alia, seeking police protection but the representations (Annexures P-5 & P-6) have not borne the desired results.

¶21

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits petitioners would be satisfied in case they are reserved liberty to file fresh comprehensive representation(s), to respondent No.3-the Superintendent of Police, Solan, whereafter, the said Authority be directed to consider and

¶22

4 -

¶23

decide the representation(s) of the petitioners for providing police protection in accordance with law. Prayer is not opposed.

¶24

4. Keeping in view the aforesaid submissions as also the pleadings in the writ petition, but without examining the merits of the case, this writ petition is disposed of with liberty reserved to the petitioners to prefer comprehensive representation(s), within one week from today, to respondent No.3-the Superintendent of Police, Solan, whereafter the said Authority shall take expeditious and appropriate call thereupon, in accordance with law, for providing police protection to the petitioners, inter alia, based upon threat perceptions faced by the petitioners.

¶25

Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also

¶26

to stand disposed of.

¶27

Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge

¶28

May 12, 2026 R.Atal

Priya Saklani and Another v. the State of Hp and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Priya Saklani and Another v. the State of Hp and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Chander Pal Aggarwal and Others Vs State of Hp and Others

Sapna Devi Vs Amarjeet K. Sharma

Ravi Kumar Vs the State of Hp and Others

Sunil Verma and Another Vs State of Hp and Others

Hoshiar Chand and Others Vs the State of Hp and Others

Lalit Pathak Vs Deputy Commissioner and Others