IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No.M-16545 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision: 30th May, 2011 Prabhjot Kaur … Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others … Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA Present: Mr. Naveen Batra, Advocate for the petitioner. KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. (ORAL) Present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking protection to the life and liberty of the petitioner, who allegedly apprehends danger at the hands of respondents No.4 to 10. Counsel for the petitioner has contended that even though in the representation (Annexure P-4), the petitioner had not named the assailant who had fired the shot, but Manjit Singh husband of the petitioner, at whom the shot was fired, in his statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. has named the accused. It is stated that still the investigating agency is not taking any steps to proceed further in case arising out of FIR No.56 dated 10.05.2011. It is stated that the marriage performed by the petitioner with Manjit Singh has not been accepted by parents of the petitioner and they are trying to brow-beat the petitioner and her husband Manjit Singh. Learned counsel has further stated that respondent No.4-Bhupinder Singh, ASI Police Station Sadar, District Hoshiarpur is colluding with the accused. Issue notice of motion to respondents No.1 to 3 only. On the asking of Court, Mr. B.S. Sra, Additional Advocate General, Punjab, Criminal Misc. No. M-16545 of 2011 (O&M) accepts notice on their behalf. A copy of the petition has been supplied to him. Counsel for the State, after going through the contents of this petition, has stated that the investigating agency shall conclude the investigation in the impugned FIR and the final report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. along with the opinion of the Investigating Officer shall be submitted in the Court of concerned Area Judicial Magistrate within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. Counsel for the petitioner has stated that the first prayer made in this petition stands answered by the statement made by counsel for the State above. So far as the second prayer for grant of protection to the life and liberty of the petitioner and her husband is concerned, respondent No.3-SHO, Police Station Sadar Hoshiarpur is directed to assess threat perception to the petitioner and her husband and if required, ensure necessary vigil that no harm is caused to their life. The present petition stands disposed of in terms of the statement made by counsel for the State and the observations made by this Court above. A copy of this order, duly attested by the Special Secretary of this Court, be supplied to counsel for the State for onward transmission and compliance. [KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA] JUDGE May 30, 2011 rps 2