Mahesh Grover, J. - (1.) LEARNED Counsel for the Petitioners has persistently made a request since yesterday that the case is urgent and should be taken up. Accordingly, the case is taken up on board. Registry is directed to number the petition.
(2.) I have perused the petition and the averments made therein. In this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure the Petitioners pray for issuance of a direction to Respondent No. 2 for grant of adequate protection to their life which is alleged to be in danger at he hands of Respondent No. 3 who is an Inspector and wishes to implicate the Petitioners in a false case.
(3.) IT is alleged that Petitioner No. 1 is an agriculturist and Petitioner No. 2 is a teacher by profession. Their relation Mehal Singh is contesting the election of Sikh Gurudwara Prabandhak Committee (in short 'SGPC'). Respondent No. 3, who is supported by one political party and is acting at their behest, and Respondent No. 4, who happens to be the executive member of the SGPC, are supporting the other candidates. They are threatening to implicate the Petitioners in a false case. To enhance their case reference has been made to the incident of the year 2010 when Petitioner No. 2 filed a criminal writ petition and got appointed a Warrant Officer to search the premises of the police station where Respondent No. 3 was posted. A complaint was also preferred to the Human Rights Commission, Punjab in this regard. Subsequently, in the same year a complaint was filed before the Court for registration of an FIR against Respondent No. 3. It is with this backdrop that a case is sought to be built up that the Petitioners are apprehending danger at the hands of Respondent No. 3. To further strengthen this allegation it is stated that on 8.9.2011 at about 11.00 p.m. when Petitioner No. 1 and said Mehal Singh were campaigning for their candidate, Respondent No. 3 came along with some other police officials and arrested Mehal Singh. He was shown to be arrested from Zira because Respondent No. 3 wanted to take revenge and moreover under the pressure of the ruling party he wanted to defeat the purpose of election. The brother of Petitioner No. 1 was arrested so as to deliberately keep him away from the election process. The Petitioners made a representation dated 11.9.2011 to Respondent No. 2 highlighting their grievance but No. action has been taken.;