CWP No. 265 of 2008 11.3.2008 Present: Mr. Y.P.S.Dhaulta, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. R.K. Bawa, Advocate General, with Mr. Ram Murti Bisht, Deputy Advocate General for Respondents No.1 to 3. This petition is totally misconceived. The petitioner has prayed for the grant of the following relief:- i) that Respondent No.4 Anita Devi be restrained to file/register false cases against the petitioner and his family members. ii) That directions be issued to Respondents No. 1, 2 and 3 to provide adequate security to the petitioner and his family members. iii) That Respondents No. 1 to 3 be directed to institute appropriate proceedings against respondents No. 4 to 11. iv) Any other writ, order or directions, which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit, just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case. As far as the first prayer is concerned, no Court can grant such a prayer. No party can be injuncted from filing or registering any case. Whether the cases are true or false, has to be decided in accordance with the prescribed legal procedure. By means of the second prayer the petitioner has prayed that the respondent-State be directed to provide security to him. There is not a single averment in the petition that the respondents have bodily harmed the petitioner. The only averment is that he and his family members have been threatened. If that be so, the petitioner is at liberty to file a criminal case against the respondent. But on this count alone the State cannot be directed to provide security to the petitioner. There is no merit in the petition, which is dismissed in limine . ( Deepak Gupta) J. March 11, 2008 ( Rajiv Sharma ) J. ™