IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH (105) CRWP-4420-2025 Decided on :08.07.2025 KAMLESH GUPTA ……Petitioner(s) Versus STATE OF U.T. CHANDIGARH & OTHERS ……Respondent(s) CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Present:- Mr. Siddarth, Advocate for the petitioner. **** SUMEET GOEL, JUDGE (Oral) 1. The petition in hand has been preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India with the following substantive prayer(s):- “i).Issuance of directions to the respondents Nos.2 and 3 to safeguard the life and liberty of the petitioner and vacate the house of the petitioner. ii). Issuance of appropriate directions to the respondents No.2 to 3 to provide protection to the life and liberty to the petitioner not to harass by the police officials and not calling them in police stations again and again and vacate the house of petitioner. xxxxxxxxxxxx” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner after arguing for sometime has limited his prayer by stating that he would be satisfied, for the nonce, if a direction is issued to respondent No.2 (Senior Superintendent of Police, U.T. Chandigarh) to consider and take a conscious decision on the representation dated 07.03.2025 made by the petitioner (copy whereof has been annexed as Annexure P-3 with the petition in hand) in a time-bound manner. 3. Notice of motion. NAVEEN NAGPAL 2025.07.08 17:57 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment HIgh Court Chandigarh CRWP-4420-2025 P a g e | 2 4. On the strength of advance copy, Mr. Samir Rathaur, Addl. Public Prosecutor accepts notice on behalf of the respondent Nos.1 to 3. Mr. Sunil Narang, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.4 and filed his vakalatnama. He has urged that he has no objection in case limited prayer made by the petitioner, for decision of his representation dated 07.03.2025 (Annexure P-3), is directed for. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the rival party(s) and upon perusal of the paper-book, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the petition in hand with the following directions: (i) Respondent No.2 (Senior Superintendent of Police, U.T. Chandigarh) is mandated to look into the representation dated 07.03.2025 (Annexure P-3) moved by the petitioner, objectively consider the grievance(s) raised therein & take ratiocinated decision thereupon within a period of 15 days from today. Said decision be conveyed to the petitioner within 7 days thereafter. (ii) No order as to costs. (SUMEET GOEL) July 08, 2025 JUDGE Naveen Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No NAVEEN NAGPAL 2025.07.08 17:57 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment HIgh Court Chandigarh