Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2025 DAILYLAW 89340 (PNJ)

MAMTA RANI v. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

CRWP/8681/2025 · 2025-08-13

Namit Kumar

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

CRWP-8681 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA Mamta Rani State of Punjab and others CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAMIT KUMAR Present: - NAMIT KUMAR, J. 1. the Constitution of India for the life and personal liberty of the petitioner and also directing respondents No.4 to 9 not to interfere in the personal life and liberty of the petitioner and further directing respondents No.2 and 3 not to all respondents No.4 to 9 or anybody else to interfere in the liberty and life of the petitioner or to harass her in any manner against the wishes of the petitioner or to cause any detriment to the petitioner in any manner. Further prayer has been made for 30.07.2025 (Annexure P respondent No.2, in accordance with law. 8681 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRWP-8681 of 2025 Date of decision Mamta Rani Versus State of Punjab and others CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAMIT KUMAR Ms. Sheena Khanna, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Adhiraj Singh, AAG, Punjab. NAMIT KUMAR, J. (ORAL) Instant second petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for directing respondents No.2 and 3 to protect the life and personal liberty of the petitioner and also directing respondents No.4 to 9 not to interfere in the personal life and liberty of the petitioner and further directing respondents No.2 and 3 not to all respondents No.4 to 9 or anybody else to interfere in the liberty and life of the petitioner or to harass her in any manner against the wishes of the petitioner or to cause any detriment to the petitioner in any manner. Further prayer has been made for investigation on representation dated 30.07.2025 (Annexure P-4), submitted by the petitioner before respondent No.2, in accordance with law. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 8681 of 2025 Date of decision: 13.08.2025 ......Petitioner ......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAMIT KUMAR s. Sheena Khanna, Advocate, Mr. Adhiraj Singh, AAG, Punjab. Instant second petition has been filed under Article 226 of directing respondents No.2 and 3 to protect the life and personal liberty of the petitioner and also directing respondents No.4 to 9 not to interfere in the personal life and liberty of the petitioner and further directing respondents No.2 and 3 not to allow respondents No.4 to 9 or anybody else to interfere in the liberty and life of the petitioner or to harass her in any manner against the wishes of the petitioner or to cause any detriment to the petitioner in any manner. investigation on representation dated 4), submitted by the petitioner before RAVINDER SINGH 2025.08.18 16:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRWP-8681 of 2025 2. (Mamta Rani v. State of Punjab and others), on 29.07.2025 and the following order was passed 3. said order has not been annexed with the present petition. Further, perusal of the file shows that alleged r dated 30.07.2025 and the petition has been 8681 of 2025 The petitioner had earlier filed CRM (Mamta Rani v. State of Punjab and others), on 29.07.2025 and the following order was passed “1. Instant petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for directing respondents No.2 and 3 to protect the life and liberty of the petitioner by directing respondents No.4 to 9 not to interfere in the personal life and liberty of the petitioner and further directing respondents No.2 and 3 not to allow respondents No.4 to 9 or anybody else to interfere. It is further prayed that investigation be conducted in accord the representation dated 17.07.2025 (Annexure P wrongly typed as Annexure P-2 in the headnote) submitted by the petitioner before respondent No.2. 2. Perusal of the file shows that the alleged representation is dated 17.07.2025 and the sent by courier to respondent No.2 on 21.07.2025 and whereas the instant petition has been prepared on 18.07.2025 and has been filed on 22.07.2025 i.e. before the receipt of the said representation by the concerned respondent. Therefore, filing of the instant petition is totally an abuse of process of law as the petitioner has not waited for the outcome of the representation. 3. Consequently, the present petition deserves to be dismissed with costs. 4. At this stage, learned counsel for petitioner wishes to withdraw the present petition. 5. Dismissed as withdrawn.” There is concealment on the part of the petitioner as the said order has not been annexed with the present petition. Further, perusal of the file shows that alleged representation (Annexure P dated 30.07.2025 and the petition has been filed 2 The petitioner had earlier filed CRM-M-40209 of 2025 (Mamta Rani v. State of Punjab and others), which came up for hearing on 29.07.2025 and the following order was passed: - Instant petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for directing respondents No.2 and 3 to protect the life and liberty of the petitioner ents No.4 to 9 not to interfere in the personal life and liberty of the petitioner and further directing respondents No.2 and 3 not to allow respondents No.4 to 9 or anybody else to interfere. It is further prayed that investigation be conducted in accordance with law on the representation dated 17.07.2025 (Annexure P-4, 2 in the headnote) submitted by the petitioner before respondent No.2. Perusal of the file shows that the alleged representation is dated 17.07.2025 and the same has been sent by courier to respondent No.2 on 21.07.2025 and whereas the instant petition has been prepared on 18.07.2025 and has been filed on 22.07.2025 i.e. before the receipt of the said representation by the concerned ling of the instant petition is totally an abuse of process of law as the petitioner has not waited for the outcome of the representation. Consequently, the present petition deserves to At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner wishes to withdraw the present petition. Dismissed as withdrawn.” There is concealment on the part of the petitioner as the said order has not been annexed with the present petition. Further, epresentation (Annexure P-4) is filed on 06.08.2025. RAVINDER SINGH 2025.08.18 16:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRWP-8681 of 2025 4. wishes to withdraw the present petition. 5. 13.08.2025 R.S. 8681 of 2025 Faced with this situation, learned counsel for the petitioner wishes to withdraw the present petition. Dismissed as withdrawn. Whether speaking/reasoned Whether Reportable 3 Faced with this situation, learned counsel for the petitioner (NAMIT KUMAR) JUDGE : Yes/No : Yes/No RAVINDER SINGH 2025.08.18 16:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document