Petitioner sought restoration of two security guards after the State withdrew one, alleging threat to life. State counsel stated another security person had been deployed and security depends on threat perception. Court found no further orders necessary and disposed of the petition.
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.
CRWP No.3237 of 2024
275 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CRWP No.3237 of 2024
Date of Decision: 02.08.2024
Harbhajan Singh Dhatti ...Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab and others …Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA
Present: Ms. Aarushi Garg, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Jasjit Singh, DAG, Punjab.
ANOOP CHITKARA, J.
Apprehending threat to his life and liberty, petitioner has come up before this Court to restore two security guards for protection of life and liberty as respondents have withdrawn one security guard since 26.01.2024 without assessing the threat to life of petitioner.
security.
(ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE 02.08.2024 anju rani Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes Whether reportable: No.
1
ANJU RANI 2024.08.06 12:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court Chandigarh
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the State could withdraw one security guard from the petitioner without assessing the threat to his life and liberty.
Harbhajan Singh Dhatti
State of Punjab
Anoop Chitkara
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
