IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 101 COCP-1789-2026 (O&M) Date of decision: 10.07.2026 Sandeep Sharma ...Petitioner Versus Gaurav Yadav and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS SURI Present: Mr. Sameer Sachdeva, Advocate with Mr. Sarabjit Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Sandeep Singh, AAG, Punjab. ***** VIKAS SURI, J. (Oral) 1. This petition has been filed for initiating proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, for alleged wilful disobedience of order dated 03.03.2025 (Annexure P-1) passed by a coordinate Bench of this Court in CRM-M-11641-2025, whereby the following direction was issued: “Without adverting to the merits of the case and in view of the statement made by learned counsel for the petitioner, the present petition is disposed of with a request to respondent No.2-Director General of Police, Punjab, to direct the concerned officer to look into the representations dated 12.08.2024 and 01.07.2024, Annexures P-5 & P-9 and decide the same in accordance with law within a period of three weeks SUMIT KUMAR 2026.07.13 14:06 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment COCP-1789-2026 (O&M) -2- from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order. The order so passed be communicated to the petitioner, within a weeks thereafter.” 2. The following order was passed in the present case, on 20.04.2026: “Present contempt petition has been filed alleging violation of order dated 03.3.2025 (Annexure P-1) passed by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in CRM-M-11641-2025 titled as “Sandeep Sharma vs. State of Punjab and others”, whereby respondent No.2-Director General of Police, Punjab was directed “…to direct the concerned officer to look into the representations dated 12.8.2024 and 01.7.2024, Annexures P-5 and P-9 and decide the same in accordance with law within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order. The order so passed be communicated to the petitioner, within a weeks thereafter.” Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a decorated retired police officer, who has rendered 34 years of service and has retired as Assistant Inspector General of Police, Punjab. It is submitted that the petitioner has faced a serious threat perception; as evident from the fact that two gangsters, on the basis of confessional statements, were convicted vide judgments dated 04.4.2025 (Annexures P-6 and P- 7) in FIR No.150 dated 28.7.2023, under Sections 294, 115, 500, 506, 34 IPC, registered at Police Station Haibowal, Ludhiana. However, without appreciating the above facts, the representations of the petitioner has been decided in a slipshod manner and proper action has not been taken. It is further admitted that SUMIT KUMAR 2026.07.13 14:06 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment COCP-1789-2026 (O&M) -3- although an FIR No.145 dated 12.9.2025 (Annexure P- 9) has been registered under Section 195-A IPC at Police Station Haibowal, however, no action has been taken thereupon and the investigation is still pending. Learned counsel for the State, on instructions from ASI Sudarshan Kumar, has informed that in compliance of the Writ Court order dated 3.3.2025 (Annexure P-1), the representations of the petitioner stood decided vide order dated 03.4.2025. It is submitted that even two security officers, namely, Dharminder Singh, C-2, Belt No.492/3RD CDO alongwith weapon AK-47; and Karanveer Singh, Constable Belt No.3018/LDH have been deployed as PSOs with the petitioner for his security and protection. It is submitted that therefore, strict compliance of the Writ Court order dated 03.3.2025 (Annexure P-1) already stands made and there is no willful disobedience of order of this Court. Learned counsel for the State has handed over copies of the orders dated 31.3.2025 and 03.4.2025 in the Court, which are taken on record. However, in respect to the investigation in the FIR No.145 dated 12.9.2025 (Annexure P-9), learned counsel for the State seeks time to get instructions and file reply. Adjourned to 06.7.2026.” 3. In deference to order dated 20.04.2026, compliance affidavit dated 05.07.2026 of Swapan Sharma, IPS, Commissioner of Police, Ludhiana, District Ludhiana, was filed by learned State counsel, on 06.07.2026. A speaking order dated 03.04.2025 has been appended as Annexure R-1 to the said compliance affidavit. A copy thereof stands SUMIT KUMAR 2026.07.13 14:06 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment COCP-1789-2026 (O&M) -4- furnished to learned counsel for the petitioner. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though belatedly, but substantial compliance has been made. Averments made in para 8 of the aforesaid affidavit have been brought to the notice of the Court, which reads thus: “That apart from deciding the representations, in view of the assessed threat perception, two security officers, namely, Dharminder Singh, C-2, Belt No.492/3RD CDO AK-47 and Karanveer Singh, alongwith weapon Constable Belt No.3018/LDH have been deployed as PSOs with the petitioner for his security and protection.” 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has raised an apprehension on behalf of the petitioner that out of two security guards deputed for his security, one had proceeded on leave and remained absent from duty for a period of about six months, and no replacement was sent on his behalf. The said lapse is a grave security breach and should have been avoided. 6. Learned State counsel, on instructions from Mr. Jatinder Pal Singh, ACP (West), Ludhiana, submits that two security officers have now been deputed for petitioner’s security, and in case either of them proceeds on leave, a suitable replacement shall be sent without delay, and the situation that had arisen in the past, shall not be repeated. 7. In view of the above, learned counsel for the petitioner does not press the present petition any further. SUMIT KUMAR 2026.07.13 14:06 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment COCP-1789-2026 (O&M) -5- 8. Accordingly, no further orders are required to be passed and the respondents shall remain bound by the stand taken in the compliance affidavit as well as statement made before this Court, noticed hereinabove. 9. The present petition is disposed of. (VIKAS SURI) July 10, 2026 JUDGE sumit.k Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes / No Whether Reportable : Yes / No SUMIT KUMAR 2026.07.13 14:06 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment