SANJEEV KUMAR Vs. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PATIALA AND OTHERS
LAWS(P&H)-2016-7-221
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Decided on July 22,2016

SANJEEV KUMAR Appellant
VERSUS
Superintendent Of Police, Patiala And Others Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) Crm-21687-2016 This is an application for placing on record the affidavits Annexures P-9 and P-10 of Baljinder and Cheter, who are working as labourer and Munshi/Manager respectively with the petitioner. The affidavits are taken on record subject to all just exceptions. CRM stands disposed of. CRM-M-23398-2016 Prayer in this petition filed under Section 482 Cr.PC is to provide protection to the life and liberty of the petitioner at the hands of private respondents No.3 and 4, namely, Bahadur Singh and Shadi Singh, who along with certain other persons are raising constant threats and the petitioner is not being allowed to carry out construction of poultry farm on the land owned by him.
(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that vide registered sale deed dated 16.3.2016, he has purchased 10 Bighas 6 Biswas land situated at village Shamu Kalan, Tehsil Rajpura, District Patiala. The sale deed was executed in the name of M/s A-One Poultry Farm for a consideration of Rs.31,01,000/- from one Shri Mani Singh son of Amar Singh, resident of village Sambhu Kalan, Tehsil Rajpura. Petitioner has sought all necessary permission from the Punjab Pollution Control Board so as to start the business/industry under the name and style of "M/s A-One Poultry Farm". Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that when the petitioner started raising construction for the poultry farm, some notorious persons along with respondents No.3 and 4 disrupted him from raising the construction. These persons have extended open threat to eliminate the petitioner, his family members and the labourers working over there. The factum of threat on the life and liberty of the petitioner and the labourers working at the said poultry farm was duly brought to the notice of the police at Police Station, Shambu by way of complaint dated 17.6.2016 (Annexure P-2), but no action thereon has been taken by the police. Notice of motion to respondents No.1 and 2 only at this stage.
(3.) On asking of this Court, Mr. Kirat Singh Sidhu, DAG, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of these respondents. Let requisite number of copies of paper book be given to learned State counsel during the course of the day. Heard. Without commenting upon the merits of the case and considering the affidavits so submitted by the petitioner and his workers that they are getting threats at the hands of respondents No.3 and 4, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent No.1 i.e. Senior Superintendent of Police, Patiala to look into the contents of complaint dated 17.6.2016 (Annexure P-2) submitted to the concerned police in-charge and to take necessary action thereon in accordance with law.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.