High CourtsSingle Bench

Amarjit Singh And Others vs State Of Punjab And Others

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 3 October 2022 · Citation: (2022) 10 P&H CK 0005

HON’BLE JUDGES
Avneesh Jhingan, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Writ Petition No. 9491 Of 2022

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

14 paragraphs · 381 words

Avneesh Jhingan, J

This second petition is filed seeking directions to the official respondents to protect the life and liberty of the petitioners and not to interfere in their personal lives.

The earlier petition filed by the petitioners was dismissed by this court on 21.9.2022 by passing the following order:

“This petition is filed seeking direction to the official respondents to protect life and liberty of the petitioners and not to interfere in their personal lives.

From the pleadings, it is forthcoming that son of the petitioner is an accused in FIR No.108 dated 12.9.2022, under Sections 307/323 IPC, registered at Police Station Shimlapuri, District Ludhiana and the police is trying to apprehend him.

The grievance raised in the present petition is that the representation 17.9.2022 has not been considered.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are being harassed, the police is conducting raids for apprehending their son and are in constant fear.

Learned counsel for the State appearing on advance notice opposes the prayer of the petitioners. He submits that the petition is pressure tactics to delay apprehension of the son of the petitioners who is an accused. From the perusal of the representation, it is forthcoming that apart from bald allegations, no specific incident has been mentioned in the representation. There are no details as to when the raid was conducted by the police officials and whether they were having required documents or not.

The contention of learned counsel for the State is correct that the presentation has been filed only as a tool to ensure delay of apprehension of the son of the petitioners in an FIR. No interference is called for.

The petition is dismissed.”

The second petition has been filed for the same relief by filing another representation by making bald statement and vague allegations against the police authorities. It is not disputed that son of the petitioners is an accused in FIR No. 108 dated 12.9.2022, under Sections 307/323 IPC, registered at Police Station Shimlapuri, District Ludhiana and is absconding.

Learned counsel for the petitioners on instructions submits that till date, son of the petitioners has not been granted any anticipatory bail.

No ground is made out for interference in the second petition filed for the same relief.

The petition is dismissed.