CRWP-4697-2025 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 112 CRWP-4697-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision: 02.07.2025 Vijay Kumar .....Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHABIR SINGH SINDHU Present: Mr. Pankaj Middha, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Shiva Khurmi, AAG, Punjab. **** MAHABIR SINGH SINDHU , J. Present petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution praying for issuance of directions to official respondent No.2 to protect life and liberty of petitioner at the hands of respondent Nos. 5 to 9. 2. Although there is no formal notice of motion in this case but learned State counsel has produced status report by way of affidavit dated 01.07.2025 of Mr. Amandeep Singh, PPS, Assistant Commissioner of Police, Central, Jalandhar on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 to 3 and same is taken on record. Copy supplied to the other side. Registry to tag the same at appropriate place. 3. For reference, relevant paras of the aforesaid status report reads as under:- “23. That so far as prayer of petitioner with regard to protection for his life and liberty is concerned, in that context, petitioner was joined into inquiry qua the application, who has stated to treat his applications as his statement. Except this, petitioner has not referred to any incident of any kind or any threat; who, in his application, mentioned about harassment on the part of Rajeev Purohit 2025.07.03 09:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRWP-4697-2025 2 respondent party and police officers as also regarding threats extended to him, whereas, during inquiry, petitioner could not produce any cogent evidence regarding harassment on the part of respondent party and police officers as also regarding threats extended to him. The Police officers have discharged their official duty as per the situation prevailing on the spot at the relevant point of time, however, by issuance of separate letter, SHO, Police Station Rama Mandi, Jalandhar has been instructed to keep surveillance regarding protection of petitioner Vijay Kumar. Hence no truth has been found in the applications of the petitioner and the same has been recommended to be filed. A copy of report dated 25.06.2025 is attached herewith as Annexure R-1. 24. That the said report was forwarded to ADCP-1, Jalandhar who agreed with the report and in turn forwarded the same to respondent No.3, who has finally approved the same and filed the same. 25. That since the representations/applications of the petitioner has already been decided, as fully explained above, the present petition has been rendered infructuous and the same may kindly be dismissed.” 4. In view of the aforesaid stand taken by official respondent Nos.1 to 3 in Para Nos. 23, 24 and 25 of status report, learned counsel for petitioner, on instructions, wishes to withdraw the petition, “at this stage”. 5. Disposed off accordingly. 6. Needless to say that above observations be not construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed off. 02.07.2025 (MAHABIR SINGH SINDHU) Rajeev (rvs) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No Rajeev Purohit 2025.07.03 09:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document