KULDEEP KAUR AND ANOTHER v. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS
CRWP/5794/2025 · 2025-07-14
Sanjay Vashisth
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 65258 (PNJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 65258 (PNJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
CRWP-5794-2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 111 CRWP-5794-2025
Decided on :14.07.2025 Kuldeep Kaur and another . . . Petitioner(s) Versus State of Punjab and others . . . Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH Present: None for the petitioners. Mr. Neeraj Madaan, Sr. DAG, Punjab. **** SANJAY VASHISTH
, J. (Oral)
1. Present writ petition has been filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, seeking issuance of a writ in the nature of Mandamus, directing the official respondents to protect the life and personal liberty of the petitioners by providing adequate police protection/security. It is further prayed that respondents No. 4 to 7 be restrained from interfering in the personal life and liberty of the petitioners.
2. It appears that the dispute in the present case primarily pertains to the use and access of an 11-feet wide path through Killa No. 148, as mentioned in the sale deeds dated 12.06.2019, executed in favour of petitioner Nos. 1 and 2. The petitioners have already filed a civil suit for permanent injunction against respondent Nos. 4 to 6, bearing Civil Suit No. CS/760/2020, in which the learned Additional Civil Judge, Sangrur, vide order dated 26.10.2020, has granted status quo with respect to the path in question. In addition, the petitioners have approached the RASHMI 2025.07.14 18:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CRWP-5794-2025 police authorities through multiple representations, seeking implementation of the status quo order and protection to access their agricultural land.
3. Having considered the nature of the relief sought, it is evident that the dispute is essentially civil in nature, revolving around property rights and access through a disputed path. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to exercise its extraordinary writ jurisdiction under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India. Accordingly, the present writ petition is dismissed, (SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE 14.07.2025 Rashmi Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No RASHMI 2025.07.14 18:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document