148 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRWP-3013-2025 Date of decision: 27.03.2025 Sukhbir Dass ....Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR Present: Mr. Rajesh K. Kataria, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Geeta Sharma, DAG, Haryana. HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J. (ORAL) The present petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ, order or direction for providing adequate security protection to the petitioner, the temple property and the devotees at the hands of respondent No.5 and his associates. Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia contends that the FIR in question was registered on 14.03.2025 and till date, the jurisdictional police authorities have neither concluded the investigation nor arrested accused named in the FIR and they have failed to perform their statutory duty and petitioner is living under constant threat as the accused has a criminal background and is involved in more than 12 FIRs, details of which have been annexed as Annexure P-5. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner would be satisfied in case a direction is issued to respondent No.2 to consider and decide the representation dated 18.03.2025 (Annexure P-2) submitted by the petitioner in a time bound manner. Neha 2025.03.28 18:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRWP-3013-2025 -2- Notice of motion to the official respondents only. Mr. Vikas Bhardwaj, AAG, Haryana, puts in appearance and accepts notice on behalf of the official respondents-State and copy of the petition has been supplied in the Court. Keeping in view the prayer made by the petitioner and without commenting anything on the merits of the case, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2 to consider and decide the representation dated 18.03.2025 (Annexure P-2) submitted by the petitioner and take appropriate steps including grant of any protection to the petitioner in view of the apprehension, if any, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order, in accordance with law. However, respondent No.2 is directed to get the threat perception of the petitioner assessed dispassionately and in case, if the apprehension of the petitioner is found valid, then respondent No.2 is directed to ensure the safety of the petitioner and to act in accordance with law. (HARPREET SINGH BRAR) JUDGE 27.03.2025 Neha Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No Neha 2025.03.28 18:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document