AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Petitioners have filed this writ petition seeking the following relief:-
"i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the respondent no. 1 to 3 to provide the necessary protection to the petitioners from the hands of respondent no. 4 to 6."
When the matter was listed on 25.11.2016, this Court, while issuing notice to respondent Nos. 4 to 6, directed the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 to provide protection to the petitioners as against respondent nos. 4 to 6.
There is no representation for respondent Nos. 4 to 6 in spite of service.
Today, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that he has no threat from respondent No. 5, but, there is an apprehension that respondent Nos. 4 and 6 may threaten the petitioners. He further submits that in compliance of the order of the Court, necessary protection was provided to the petitioners.
Mr. D.K. Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General submits that in compliance of the interim order passed by this Court, necessary protection was provided to the petitioners. He further submits that in case, petitioners represent before the 2nd and 3rd respondents of any threat by respondent Nos. 4 and 6 to the petitioners, respondent Nos. 2 and 3 will look into it and if the complaint of threat is found genuine, they will give protection to the petitioners as against respondent Nos. 4 and 6 as and when required.
Recording the said submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, we close the writ petition.
The writ petition is closed.