In a protection petition filed under Article 226, the petitioner sought directives for protection from private respondent No. 6. The court noted that a fresh FIR was registered against the respondent after the petition was filed, leading the petitioner to seek withdrawal.
Petition disposed of after being withdrawn by the petitioner.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
2023:PHHC:057318 CRWP-224-2023 - 1 -
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
211
CRWP-224-2023 Decided on : 24.04.2123
Sukhwinder Singh
. . . Petitioner(s)
Versus
State of Punjab and others
. . . Respondent(s)
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH
PRESENT: Mr. Rahul Bhargava, Advocate for the petitioner(s).
Mr. J.S. Arora, DAG, Punjab assisted by ASI Harbans Singh.
Ms. Shikha Khullar Jaidka, Advocate for respondent No.6.
SANJAY VASHISTH, J. (Oral)
order was passed:-
“ Prayer in the instant petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is for issuance of directions to official respondents to provide protection of life and liberty to the petitioner, at the hands of private respondent No. 6.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner had lodged one FIR no. 11 dated 22.01.2014 registered at Police Station Dehlon, District Ludhiana under Section 420 IPC, against respondent No. 6 for cheating of an amount of Rs. 80 lacs. Counsel submits that petitioner is possessed with one CCTV Footage, wherein, it is clearly visible that on 04.11.2022, respondent No. 6 tried to run over the petitioner through Innova
JAWALA RAM 2023.04.24 17:08 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgement.
2023:PHHC:057318 CRWP-224-2023 - 2 -
car, therefore, petitioner is all the times apprehensive that some untoward incident at the behest of respondent No. 6 may damage his life.
Notice of motion.
On asking of the Court, Mr. J. S. Arora, DAG, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of respondent-State. He seeks time to file status report.
Adjourned to 22.02.2023.”
(SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE
April 24, 2123 J.Ram
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No
JAWALA RAM 2023.04.24 17:08 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgement.
Sukhwinder Singh
State of Punjab
Respondent No.6
Sanjay Vashisth
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
