Disposed

Wasiq Ali v. State of Punjab and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC23 Aug 2023CRWP/8247/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 Cr.P.C, the petitioner sought protection of life and liberty. The court disposed of the petition. Liberty was reserved for the petitioner to take legal action against the alleged Panch for retaining the items.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of. Liberty reserved for the petitioner to take legal action against the alleged Panch.

Wasiq Ali Vs State of Punjab and… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Punjab & Haryana HC (2023)

¶1

2023:PHHC:109749

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

210 CRM-M-8247-2023 Date of Decision: 23.08.2023

¶4

Wasiq Ali ......... Pe��oner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State of Punjab and others ......... Respondents

¶7

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA

¶8

Present:Mr. Harkirat Singh Bhogal, Advocate for the pe��oner.

¶9

Mr. Karunesh Kaushal, AAG, Punjab.

¶10

¶11

ANOOP CHITKARA, J. (ORAL)

¶12

The present pe��on has been filed under Ar�cle 226 of the Cons�tu�on of India read with Sec�on 482 Cr.P.C for issuance of writ in the nature of Mandamus direc�ng respondents No. 1 to 4 for protec�on of life and liberty at the hands of respondent No. 5.

¶13

Counsel for the pe��oner submits that respondent No.5, who is a police official, forcibly kept in his possession a motorcycle, mobile phone and currency notes amoun�ng to Rs. 4500/- of pe��oner. He further submits that respondent No. 5 is demanding money from the pe��oner for returning his ar�cles.

¶14

State counsel on instruc�ons from SI Gursharan Singh submits that in fact the pe��oner had done a thugee of Rs. 50,000/- from one couple and when those people informed the police about this aspect then both the par�es agreed to se�le the ma�er in Panchayat . In the said Panchayat , one Panch , namely, Usha allegedly kept pe��oner’s mobile phone, motorcycle and currency notes and stated that she would return the same only when he will return back Rs. 50,000/-. He further submits that respondent No. 5 has nothing to do with the same and there is nothing to fear from the police officials, who are doing their legal duty.

¶15

Given above, the present pe��on is disposed of. Liberty is reserved to the pe��oner to take legal ac�on against said Panch in accordance with law. All pending miscellaneous applica�ons, if any, stand disposed of.

¶16

(ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE

¶17

23.08.2023 Jyo�-II

¶18

Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No

¶19

JYOTI 2023.08.23 12:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.

Wasiq Ali v. State of Punjab and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Wasiq Ali v. State of Punjab and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ramesh Kumar Vs State of Haryana

Parveen Kumar Vs State of Punjab and Others

Paramjit Kaur Vs State of Punjab and Others

Ashok Kumar Aggarwal Vs State of Haryana

Manjit Singh @ Motta Vs State of Punjab

Amandeep Kaur and Anr. Vs State of Punjab and Others