Seema And Another vs State Of Punjab And Others

Anoop Chitkara, J

Fearing for life and liberty at the hands of the private respondents, the petitioners, invoking the fundamental right of life guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, had come up before this Court seeking protection through the State.

Notices 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 notices to the private respondents is required.

If the allegations of apprehension of threat to life turn out to be true, it might lead to an irreversible loss. Thus, in the facts and circumstances peculiar to this case, it shall be appropriate that the concerned Superintendent of Police, SHO, or any officer to whom such powers have been delegated or have been authorized in this regard, provide appropriate protection to the petitioners for one month from today. However, if the petitioners no longer require the protection, then at their request, it may be discontinued even before the expiry of one month. After that, the concerned officers shall extend the protection on day-to-day analysis of the ground realities or upon the oral or written request of the petitioners.

This protection is subject to the stringent condition that from the time such protection is given, the petitioners shall not go outside the boundaries of the place of residence, except for medical necessities, to buy household necessities, and for bereavements in the families of the close relatives or close friends. This restriction saves the petitioners from apprehended risk and ensures that the protection is not flaunted.

It is clarified that there is no adjudication on merits and that this order is not a blanket bail in any FIR. It is further clarified that this order shall not come in the way if the interrogation of the petitioners is required in any cognizable case. It shall also be open for the petitioners to approach this Court again in case of any fresh threat perception.

As far as representation dated 21.04.2022 (Annexure P-2) and dated 30.04.2022 (Annexure P-3) is concerned, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that he would be satisfied in case directions may be issued to respondent No.3 to decide the above referred representations by passing speaking and reasoned order within time bound manner.

The prayer is not opposed.

Given above, respondents No.3-Director Bureau of Investigation, Punjab Police to decide the above referred representations either by himself/herself or delegating to any other officer holding IPS cadre by passing a speaking and reasoned order within 30 working days from today.

In case, the grievance of the petitioner still exists, he shall be at liberty to avail legal remedy in accordance with law including approaching this Court. The order of representation be communicated to the representationist immediately.

There would be no need for a certified copy of this order, and any Advocate for the Petitioners and State can download this order and other relevant particulars from the official web page of this court and attest it to be a true copy. The concerned officer can also verify its authenticity and may download and use the downloaded copy for immediate use.

Petition is allowed to the extent mentioned above. All pending applications, if any, stand disposed.