Deepak Kumar Vs State of Punjab and Others — Punjab & Haryana HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Deepak Kumar Vs State of Punjab and Others — Punjab & Haryana HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Direction to the concerned Senior Superintendent of Police to decide the representation dated 21.03.2025 (Annexure P-4) by 30.04.2025, personally or through a delegated IPS-cadre officer, by a reasoned order communicated to the representationists and their counsel without delay; liberty reserved to file a fresh petition or pursue other legal remedies; no adjudication on merits; all pending applications disposed.

Issue for consideration

Whether directions should be issued to respondents No. 2 and 3 to take strict legal action against respondent No. 6, alleged to be blackmailing the petitioner by filing false criminal complaints against him. +1 more

Court's answer

There is no adjudication on merits of the allegations against respondent No. 6.

Ratio / Principle

The representation dated 21.03.2025 (Annexure P-4) shall be decided by the concerned Senior Superintendent of Police by 30.04.2025.

Key takeaways

The decision may be made by the Senior Superintendent of Police himself/herself or by authorizing and delegating it to any officer holding IPS cadre.ratio¶16
The decision on the representation must be a reasoned order, communicated to the representationists as well as their counsel without delay.ratio¶16
This order shall not come in the way if interrogation of the petitioner is required in any cognizable case.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Punjab & Haryana High Court (Anoop Chitkara, J.), CRM-M-19584-2025, decided 09.04.2025 — Petition under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 seeking directions to respondents No. 2 and 3 to take strict legal action against respondent No. 6, alleged to be blackmailing the petitioner by filing false criminal complaints in revenge of complaints submitted by respondent No. 5-Society (petitioner's father its Chairman). Counsel confined his request to a time-bound decision of representation dated 21.03.2025 (Annexure P-4). Held: the concerned Senior Superintendent of Police to decide the representation by 30.04.2025, himself/herself or by delegating to an IPS-cadre officer, by a reasoned order communicated to the representationists and counsel without delay; no adjudication on merits; order not to preclude the petitioner's interrogation in any cognizable case; liberty reserved to file a fresh petition or other legal remedies. Petition allowed to the extent indicated; pending applications disposed. Reportable: No.

1

CRM-M-19584-2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

142 CRM-M-19584-2025 Date of Decision: 09.04.2025

Deepak Kumar ...Pe��oner

Versus

State of Punjab and others …Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA

Present: Mr. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate for the pe��oner.

Mr. Sukhdev Singh, A.A.G, Punjab.

ANOOP CHITKARA, J.

Present pe��on has been filed under Sec�on 528 of BNSS, 2023 for issuance of direc�ons to respondents No. 2 and 3 to take strict legal ac�on against respondent No. 6, who is blackmailing the pe��oner by filing false criminal complaints against him in revenge of complaints submi�ed against him by respondent No. 5-Society, where the pe��oner’s father is designated as Chairman.

At the outset, counsel for the pe��oner submits that he would be contended and sa�sfied if direc�ons are issued to decide representa�on dated 21.03.2025 (Annexure P-4) within the �me bound manner.

No�ces are served upon the official respondents through the State's counsel. Given the nature of the order that this Court proposes to pass, neither the response of official respondents nor the issuance of no�ces to the private respondents is required.

Let the representa�on dated 21.03.2025 (Annexure P-4) be decided by the concerned Senior Superintendent of Police, by 30.04.2025, either himself/herself or by authorizing and delega�ng it to any officer holding IPS cadre. It is clarified that such order must be a reasoned order, and the same be communicated to the representa�onists as well as his counsel without delay.

Liberty reserved to the pe��oner to file fresh pe��on or to take other legal remedies in accordance with the law.

JYOTI 2025.04.10 12:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.

CRM-M-19584-2025

2

It is clarified that there is no adjudica�on on merits. It is further clarified that this order shall not come in the way if the interroga�on of the pe��oner is required in any cognizable case.

There would be no need for a cer�fied copy of this order, and any Advocate for the Pe��oner and State can download this order and other relevant par�culars from the official web page of this court and a�est it to be a true copy. The concerned officer can also verify its authen�city and may download and use the downloaded copy for immediate use.

Pe��on is allowed to the extent men�oned above . All pending applica�ons, if any, stand disposed.

(ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE

09.04.2025 Jyo�-II Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes Whether reportable: No.

JYOTI 2025.04.10 12:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.