COCP No. 1892 of 2008 1 In the High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh … COCP No. 1892 of 2008 Date of decision: July 27, 2009 Paramjit Singh son of Gopal Dass ..Petitioner. Versus Sukhchain Singh Gill and others ..Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rakesh Kumar Garg Present: Mr. Manohar Dadwal, Advocate for the petitioners Mr. Mukesh Berry, Addl.A.G.Punjab for the respondents .. Rakesh Kumar Garg,J(Oral) In this case, the petitioner has alleged that vide order dated 30.3.2007 passed in Criminal Misc.No.19908-M of 2007, the Senior Superintendent of Police, Hoshiarpur was directed to ensure protection of life and liberty of the petitioner and thereafter, he was provided the protection and taking note of this fact vide order dated 20.8.2007 this court disposed of the aforesaid petition having been rendered infructuous. The allegation of the petitioner in this petition is that later on security guard provided to him was withdrawn by the respondent and thus he is guilty of contempt of this court. In reply to the show cause notice issued by this Court, reply on behalf of respondent No.1 has been filed wherein it has been submitted that as long as there was a need of security, a security guard was provided to the petitioner and thereafter on receipt of the report of SHO Talwara about the threat perception of the petitioner, the security guard was withdrawn on 6.11.2008 and thereafter, the respondent had taken all the necessary steps through local police of Talwara to ensure protection to the life and liberty of the petitioner. COCP No. 1892 of 2008 2 In view of the aforesaid stand taken by the respondent, I am not inclined to proceed further in this petition. Rule discharged. If the petitioner is aggrieved by the report of SHO Police Station Talwara about the threat perception to him, he may challenge the same in accordance with law. July 27, 2009 (RAKESH KUMAR GARG) nk JUDGE