P^J c ^ ^ <^0 BEFORE THEJiON'BLEHIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR PETITIONER : W.P.No. J-€'°° /2001 Suresh Sidara S/o- Shri Pritam Sidara, Aged-30 yrs, R/o-Near Manohar Talkies, Bilaspur (C.G.) VERSUS RESPONDENTS : l/STAT£ OF CHHATTISGARH Through Secretary Home Dept. Secretariate, •(.^Raipur- ^ _..' l"'^^- The Director Gen. of Police (C.G.), Raipur.-; .^'T.-^y^ 3. Inspector Gdn. of Polfce, Bilaspur range, .^S-^ .!••''° Bilaspur . .-- ^'^y\ 4- SUPdt of Police , Distt. Bilaspur. f'<^.h^\~^'w 5. Town Inspector, City PoUce Kotwali, Bilaspur. ^'".^"^•'' ' ^\..^"' <^- Petition U/S 226/227 of the Constitutional Law Of India -.J-^.-....^..-..__... pstes : XI-HC-22 ^^ '^rpn^pT, '^f^FTS, t^rray .W*.P..*.NQ.* 1500/2001 200 ^^[^T I^TW •311^1 '^it^'^ifin ^ m €-iT^T^Ta?8JT.'<?^ reTloTTooT Heard Shri Vipin the petitioner< Shri Gautam Bhaduri, for the responGtent / State» Return has been file<3 Shri Gautam Bhaduri by which police protection and the members of his familjy inasmach as action has been Authority against the persor^ threatened the petitioner» It is farther submittje that Infact case has been Neelkaath Kesari and after also has been submitted. pending against the said police has already taken provisions of law» it is notj order issued on 29.8*2001 to provide police protecfeior^ event of sane threat said td some persons will beccme Punjjabi^ learned counsel for learned Goveriwient Advocate "SFiN^PT^ "^FKTf ^ 1^TZt Tf^ZR: '^''3^[HW^[ sjubmits that interim order l{s given to the petitioner should be withdrawn linitiated by ttie Competent who is said to have Ittjed by Shri Gautam Bhaduri r^glstered against the said ijnvestigation Charge Sheet He|nce» proceedings are now Neejlkanth Kesari<. Since ac^ion in accordance with the desirable that interim shiould continue inasmuch as to individuals in the have beea held out by for the State^ imfjosslble [Tft^^fe^ ^t^— ^^r|^T f^ra 3TT^I ^qp-^ ^t^f t^ M^ -3TT^T'q^'cS ( ^f^^? ) The' petitioher Gan if any imminent danger is Infact^ the petitioner Authority for police required in a particular It is stated that pending against the said Caapetent State Authority warranted under the the time being in force provisions of M^P^Rajha In view of the petition is disposed o£\ Certified copy as prot^ction ^lS relev^nt ih ___L_—._—- •^p^^ THT^ ^ -f^zt ^RZR ^r3TJ^R3Tr^I always seek legal protection apprehended at any tlme<. sh<§>uld approach the Competent if such protectlon is ^ituation^ ' many as 16 cases are t?erson<, It 1s for the to take any action which is4 .^ provisions of law for the State including the Siiraksha Adhiniyam. 1980. given above^ this 1 -^ reaSons ber rules* Sd/- Chief Justice