HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** CWP No.780 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision: 17.01.2011 **** Gurcharan Singh . . . . Petitioner VS. State of Punjab & Ors. . . . . Respondents **** CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT **** 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? **** Present: Mr. BS Bali, Advocate for the petitioner ***** SURYA KANT J. (ORAL) (1). The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 09.12.2010 (Annexure P4) whereby the security earlier provided to him and his family members, had been withdrawn by the respondent-authorities. (2). The averments made in the writ petition would reveal that the parents of the petitioner were murdered by Nishan Singh @ Sana and his co-accused in relation to which FIR No.78 dated 12.07.2006 under Section 460/302 IPC in PS Bhikhiwind, District Tarn Taran was registered against the accused persons who have been subsequently convicted for life. (3). It appears that the petitioner’s brother is an IAS Officer presently serving at Delhi and he often visits his native CWP No.780 of 2011.doc - 2 – village. With a view to provide security to the petitioner including his brother that the security cover given earlier has been re-considered and withdrawn. (4). Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the records. (5). In my considered view after the conviction of the accused persons who are behind the bar, there might not be any direct threat to the life and liberty of the petitioner and/or his family members at the hands of the accused persons. A writ Court, however, cannot assess threat perception, if any, to the petitioner or his family members. Suffice it to observe that if the petitioner has bona fide apprehension of threat to his or his family’s life and liberty and has sufficient information in relation thereto, the petitioner may submit a representation to respondent No.2 for the grant of police protection. Respondent No.2 is directed to consider and dispose of the same within a period of one month from the date of its receipt. (6). It is directed that if on re-assessment the authorities find that there is a genuine apprehension to the life and liberty of the petitioner/family members, adequate remedial steps to secure the same shall be taken forthwith. 2 CWP No.780 of 2011.doc - 3 – (7). Ordered accordingly. Dasti. 17.01.2011 vishal shonkar (S u r y a K a n t) Judge 3