-1- 111 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH COCP-3208-2026 Date of Decision: 16.07.2026 KANCHAN ...Petitioner Versus RAVJOT GREWAL AND ORS ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PARMOD GOYAL Present: Mr. Parveen Chauhan, Advocate for the petitioner. Dr. D.S. Lamba, Addl. A.G., Punjab for respondents No.1 and 2. PARMOD GOYAL, J. (ORAL) Vide order dated 04.03.2025 (Annexure P1) following directions were passed by this Court :- “1. Present petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the official respondents No.1 and 2 to protect the life and liberty of the petitioner as well as her family members at the hands of respondents No.4 & 5 and to take action on their representations dated 22.02.2025 (Annexures P-1 and P-2). 2. At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has recently filed a representation on 22.02.2025 before the D.G.P, Punjab and Senior Superintendent of Police, Tarn Taran (Annexures P-1 & P-2) raising her grievances as mentioned in the present petition but the same has not yet been considered and no action has been taken thereon. He further submitted that at this stage, the petitioner would be satisfied if appropriate directions are issued to respondent No.2- Senior Superintendent of Police, Tarn Taran to decide the aforesaid representation filed by the petitioners CHIRANJEEV SINGH 2026.07.20 09:51 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document COCP-3208-2026 -2- and take necessary action thereon. 3. Notice of motion. 4. Ms. Ruchika Sabherwal, Sr. D.A.G., Punjab, who is present in Court, has accepted the notice on behalf of the respondents-State and submits that the needful will be done in due course. Let a complete set of the paperbook be supplied to her during the course of the day. 5. In view of the limited prayer made by the petitioner, without commenting anything on the merits of the case, the present petition is disposed of at this stage with a direction to respondent No.2 to decide the aforesaid representation dated 22.02.2025 (Annexure P-2) of the petitioners within a period of 15 days from today, by passing a speaking order in accordance with law. Needless to say, if any threat is found to the petitioner as well as her family members, the official respondents would provide them adequate security in order to protect their lives and liberty.” 2. Learned State counsel has pointed out that in pursuance of order passed by this Court on 04.03.2025, the representation of petitioner was rejected by respondents by passing a detailed speaking order dated 05.05.2025. In view of this fact, the order dated 04.03.2025 has been complied and accordingly, the contempt proceedings does not survive. 3. Petitioner shall be at liberty to seek his legal remedies in accordance with law. Petition stands disposed of accordingly. 4. Copy of this order be supplied to learned counsel for petitioner. 5. Pending application(s), if any, is/are disposed of accordingly. (PARMOD GOYAL) 16.07.2026 JUDGE chiranjeev Whether Speaking/Reasoned : Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No CHIRANJEEV SINGH 2026.07.20 09:51 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document