118 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, at Chandigarh Criminal Writ Petition No. 8895 of 2026 Date of Decision: 27.07.2026 Rohit Verma ... Petitioner(s) Versus The State of Punjab and Others ... Respondent(s) CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Surya Partap Singh. Present: Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Advocate for Mr. Sanjeev K. Virk, Advocate for the petitioner(s). Mr. Eklavya Darshi, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. Surya Partap Singh, J. 1. The instant petition has been filed by the petitioner for directions to the respondents No. 2 & 3 to protect the life and liberty of petitioner, his family member and employees from the respondent No. 5. 2. The learned counsel representing the petitioner submits that the petitioner has filed a representation dated 16.07.2026 (Annexure P2) before the respondent No.3. The learned counsel prays for directions to the respondent No.3 to decide the above mentioned representation within a stipulated time. 3. Notice of motion to respondent(s) No.1 to 4 only. 4. Since advance notice has already been served upon the State, Mr. Eklavya Darshi, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of respondent(s) No.1 to 4. Hence, service of notice upon DEEPAK KUMAR BHARDWAJ 2026.07.27 18:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Criminal Writ Petition No. 8895 of 2026 2 respondent(s) No.1 to 4 is hereby dispensed with. 5. Mr. Vipan Kumar, Advocate, has put in appearance on behalf of the respondent No.5 and filed memorandum of appearance. The same be taken on record. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a direction for disposing of the representation of the petitioner (Annexure P2) be given to the respondent No. 3 and that the instant writ petition be disposed of accordingly. 7. Keeping in view the aforesaid facts, the present writ petition is hereby disposed of with a direction to the respondent No.3 to decide the representation of the petitioner (Annexure P2) by passing a speaking order within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of copy of instant order. It is however clarified that no finding is being returned, by this Court, with regard to merits of the contents of representation. The respondent No.3 shall be at liberty to make an independent assessment with regard to contents of representation of the petitioner, and take an independent decision at his own level. (Surya Partap Singh) Judge July 27, 2026 “DK” Whether speaking/reasoned :Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No DEEPAK KUMAR BHARDWAJ 2026.07.27 18:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document