Mahinder Singh Vs State of Punjab and Others — Punjab & Haryana HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Mahinder Singh Vs State of Punjab and Others — Punjab & Haryana HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No substantive relief; petition disposed of. Liberty granted to the petitioner to approach the Court again if any fresh cause of action arises, subject to first availing remedies under Section 154(3) Cr.P.C. or Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. in terms of Sakiri Vasu v. State of U.P., (2008) 2 SCC 409.

Issue for consideration

Whether directions should be issued to the official respondents to take legal action against respondents No.5 to 12, who are harassing and threatening the petitioner with dire consequences and extending threats of killing. +1 more

Court's answer

In view of the status report filed on behalf of respondent-State, whereby the allegations were examined and no substance was found and civil litigation is pending between the parties, no further directions are required to be passed in the present case; the petition is disposed of accordingly.

Key takeaways

Liberty is granted to the petitioner to approach this Court again if any fresh cause of action arises.obiter¶22
In terms of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sakiri Vasu v. State of U.P., (2008) 2 SCC 409, the petitioner is first expected to use the legal remedies available under the law, such as approaching senior police officers under Section 154(3) Cr.P.C. or filing an application before the learned Magistrate under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C.obiter¶22

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal miscellaneous petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. by Mahinder Singh seeking directions to the official respondents to take legal action against private respondents No.5 to 12 for harassment and threats of killing, and protection of his life and liberty. The State filed a status report (affidavit of Anwar Ali, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Nihal Singh Wala, District Moga) in compliance of the order dated 16.01.2024, stating that the allegations were thoroughly examined, no substance was found, civil litigation is pending between the parties, and the petitioner's representation (Annexure P-2) was consigned to the record room. Held: In view of the status report, no further directions are required; petition disposed of. Liberty granted to approach the Court afresh upon any fresh cause of action; in terms of Sakiri Vasu v. State of U.P., (2008) 2 SCC 409, the petitioner is first expected to avail remedies under Section 154(3) Cr.P.C. (senior police officers) or Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. (application before the learned Magistrate).

CRM-M-2208-2024

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

251

CRM-M-2208-2024 (O&M) Date of decision: 14.05.2025

Mahinder Singh

....Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab and others

....Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR

Present: None for the petitioner.

Mr. Rishabh Singla, AAG, Punjab.

HARPREET SINGH BRAR J. (Oral)

Prayer in this petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., is for issuance of directions to official respondents to take legal action against respondents No.5 to 12, who are harassing and threatening the petitioner with dire consequences and extending threats of killing on account of the fact that the petitioner has filed representations (Annexures P-2 and P-3, respectively), against respondents No.5 to 12. Further prayer has been made to protect the life and liberty of the petitioner at the hands of the private respondents.

Learned State counsel has filed status report by way of affidavit of Anwar Ali, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Nihal Singh Wala, District Moga, in compliance of the order dated 16.01.2024 and submits that the veracity of the allegations made by the petitioner have been thoroughly examined and no substance has been found and civil litigation is already pending between the parties as such, the

MOHD YAKUB 2025.05.15 16:18 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab & Haryana High Court at Chandigarh

CRM-M-2208-2024

2

representation (Annexure P-2) filed by the petitioner was ordered to be consigned to record room.

In view of the status report filed on behalf of respondent – State, no further directions are required to be passed in the present case. Disposed of accordingly.

Liberty is granted to the petitioner to approach this Court again if any fresh cause of action arises. However, in terms of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sakiri Vasu v. State of U.P., (2008) 2 SCC 409 , the petitioner is first expected to use the legal remedies available under the law, such as approaching senior police officers under Section 154(3) Cr.P.C. or filing an application before the learned Magistrate under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C.

		(HARP	REET SINGH BRAR) JUDGE
14.05.2025 yakub
	Whether speaking/rea	soned:	Yes/No
	Whether reportable:		Yes/No

MOHD YAKUB 2025.05.15 16:18 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab & Haryana High Court at Chandigarh