Punjab-Haryana High Court
Rupa vs State Of Punjab And Others on 10 February, 2011
Author: Daya Chaudhary
Bench: Daya Chaudhary
Crl. Misc. No. M-23781 of 2010 (1)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Crl. Misc. No. M-23781 of 2010
DATE OF DECISION: 11.02.2011
Rupa ..........Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab and others ..........Respondents
BEFORE:- HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY
Present:- Ms. Upinder Kaur Bedi, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Ms. Rajni Gupta, Additional Advocate
General, Punjab.
Mr. Gursharan Singh, Advocate
for respondent No.4.
****
DAYA CHAUDHARY, J.
The present petition under section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed on behalf of Rupa for issuing directions to the official respondents to take action against respondent No.4.
Notice of motion was issued on 19.8.2010.
In response thereto, reply on behalf of respondents No.1 to 3 has already been filed and the same is on record.
Learned counsel for the respondent-State in view of the reply filed submits that preventive action under Section 107/151 Cr.P.C. has been initiated against respondent No.4 vide DDR No. 8 dated 9.10.2010 at Police Station Kotwali, Patiala and copy of calandra under Section 107/151 Cr.P.C. is annexed as Annexure R-1 with the petition. She further states Crl. Misc. No. M-23781 of 2010 (2) that there is a dispute between the petitioner and respondent No.4 and because of that dispute both the parties are against each other. Learned State counsel also brought to the notice of the Court that as respondent No.4 is behind the bars, there cannot be any possibility of any threat at her instance.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that prayer in the petition is also to protect the life and liberty of the petitioner as she is apprehending threat at the instance of respondent No.4 and there is every possibility to falsely implicate her in any false case. Learned counsel further submits that husband of the petitioner is drug addict and respondent No.4 is involved in so many cases and an FIR under NDPS Act is also pending against her.
In view of the facts mentioned above, the present petition is disposed of with a direction that if any complaint is pending or made against the petitioner, she should be given an advance notice of seven days.
February 11, 2011 (DAYA CHAUDHARY) pooja JUDGE
Note:-Whether this case is to be referred to the Reporter .......Yes/No