IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. M. No.33293-M of 2010 Date of Decision:13.1.2011 Bhupinder Singh and others .... Petitioners Versus The State of Punjab and others .... Respondents CORAM: Hon'ble Ms. Justice Nirmaljit Kaur Present: Mr. S.S. Siao, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. K.S. Pannu, D.A.G. Punjab. Mr. Ram Pal Verma, Advocate for Mr. Rajiv Sharma, Advocate for U.T. Chandigarh. Ms. Ruchi Sekhri, Advocate for respondents No.8 to 10. **** 1.Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers 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? NIRMALJIT KAUR, J.(Oral) This is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for issuance of directions to respondents No.5 to 7 not to harass the petitioners on the complaint of respondents No.8 to 10 and in case any criminal case is to be registered on the said complaint, the petitioners be given 10 days advance notice. It is pointed out that no FIR has been registered against the petitioners till date. However, it is not disputed that a complaint to the Incharge Women Cell is made. Accordingly, in case, the FIR is registered against the petitioners with respect to the aforesaid complaint and the petitioners are required in the same, they shall be given 3 days advance notice. Disposed of accordingly. 13.1.2011 ( NIRMALJIT KAUR ) rajeev JUDGE