Crl. Misc. No. M-16268 of 2011 (O&M) (1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-16268 of 2011 (O&M) DATE OF DECISION: 30.05.2011 Sahab Singh ..........Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others ..........Respondents BEFORE:- HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY Present:- Mr. Surender Dhull, Advocate for the petitioner. **** DAYA CHAUDHARY, J. Crl. Misc. No. 29238 of 2011 Application is allowed as prayed for. Crl. Misc. No. M-16268 of 2011 The present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed on behalf of Sahab Singh for issuing directions to respondents No.1 to 3 to protect the life and liberty of the petitioner as well as his family members, who are apprehending threat at the instance of respondents No.4 to 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that earlier also the petitioner has approached this Court by way of filing Crl Misc. No. M- 9695 of 2011 and inspite of passing specific direction, the representation (Annexure P-4) filed by the petitioner has not been decided so far. Heard the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner and have also gone through the documents available on record. Earlier the aforementioned petition filed by the petitioner came up for hearing before this Court on 21.4.2011, which was dismissed, Crl. Misc. No. M-16268 of 2011 (O&M) (2) however, it was mentioned that since the petitioner has already made a representation on 12.4.2010, he is at liberty to make fresh representation by mentioning specific allegation with regard to serious threat. In compliance of the said direction, petitioner has made a representation on 25.4.2011 (Annexure P-4) but no action has been taken. Since the respondents have already been directed to decide the representation filed by the petitioner, no further direction can be issued in this petition. Accordingly, the present petition is disposed of with a direction that in case the representation (Annexure P-4) is with the respondent authorities, the same should be decided and if that representation has not been decided, the petitioner can avail an alternative remedy available to him, as the official respondents have not complied with directions issued by this Court. Disposed of accordingly. May 30, 2011 (DAYA CHAUDHARY) pooja JUDGE