CRM No. M-28337 of 2009 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM No. M-28337 of 2009 Decided on:- 05.07.2011 Kuldeep Singh ......Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others .......Respondents Coram Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajai Lamba Present: Mr. Nakul Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. MS. Rajni Gupta, Addl.AG, Punjab. Mr. Umesh Kumar, Advocate for the respondent no.2 **** Ajai Lamba, J(Oral) This petition has been filed praying for direction to the respondents to re-investigate the case FIR No. 114 dated 13.9.2009 lodged for commission of offence under Section 379 IPC, Police Station Ghall Khurd, District Ferozepur by some senior Police Officer. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contends that on the first count, the petition is not pressed in so much as the challan has been presented and the petitioner is facing trial as an accused. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner prays for providing adequate security to protect the life and liberty of the petitioner. In order dated 11.3.2011, this Court had directed SSP, Ferozepur to review whether there is any threat to the petitioner or not, and in case the Officer comes to the conclusion that there is no threat, security provided to the petitioner be withdrawn. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent-State has drawn CRM No. M-28337 of 2009 2 the attention of the Court towards the affidavit dated 10.5.2011 sworn by Jasbir Singh, DSP (Sub Division), Ferozepur, wherein in para 4 it has been said that the threat perception to the petitioner has been assessed. It has been found that there is no threat perception to the petitioner. It has further been said in the affidavit that if the petitioner requires any police help, the same will be provided. It is not in dispute that the petitioner is an accused in FIR case. Even civil litigation is pending against the petitioner in a recovery suit. No such orders can be passed by this Court so as to give protection to the petitioner. The threat perception to the petitioner is required to be judged by the District Police. As per the contents of the affidavit sworn by the concerned DSP, there is no threat perception to the petitioner. In view of the above, no further orders need to be passed. It is, however, made clear that in case there is any actual and real threat to the petitioner, which warrants some action to be taken at the instance of the District Police Authorities, the petitioner would be at liberty to file an application before the concerned SSP. Disposed of. 05.07.2011 ( Ajai Lamba) mamta Judge