Jitendra Chauhan, J.— (Oral)– This petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is for directing the respondents to comply with the provisions of Section 160 Cr.P.C. and to give an advance notice of at least seven days in case the petitioners or any of their family members are required to be called in connection with any case and to protect their life and liberty and not to harass them only on account of political vendetta. 2. Petitioners are wife, son and minor daughter of Charanjit Singh @ Channi, who has filed connected petition bearing Criminal Misc. No. M-38150 of 2012. In this petition the petitioners state that the police is after Charanjit Singh @ Channi and may falsely implicate him in a case at the instance of the ruling party. It is alleged that the police has been harassing the petitioners as well. The petitioners pleaded that their life and liberty may be protected. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners drew my attention to Annexure P-8, the daily attendance register of the school and states that the petitioner No. 3, is a minor. It is further contended that the police is continuosuly raiding the house of the petitioners in order to arrest the father of petitioners No. 2 and 3 and husband of petitioner No. 1, the petitioners No.2 and 3 are not able to pursue their studies. There is no FIR against the petitioners or the father of petitioners No.2 and 3. The only prayer made by the counsel for the petitioners is that their life and liberty may be saved. 4. On the other hand learned State counsel assisted by SI Gurmit Singh and HC Preetpal Singh, submits that they require Charanjit Singh @ Channi in connection with a complaint filed by a lady, who is a complainant against him, in a criminal case and the petitioners are not required in any cognizable offence. 5. Section 160 Cr.P.C. provides as under: "160. 5. Section 160 Cr.P.C. provides as under: "160. Police Officer's power to require attenance of witnesses - (1) Any Police officer making an investigation under this Chapter may, by order in writing, require the attendance before himself of any person being within the limits of his own or any adjoining station who, from the information given or otherwise, appears to be acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the case; and such person shall attend as so required. Provided that no male person under the age of fifteen years or woman shall be required to attend at any place other than the place in which such male person or woman resides. (2) The State Government may, by rules made in this behalf, provide for the payment by the police officer of the reasonable expenses of every person, attending under sub-section (1) at any place other than his residence." 6. Learned counsel for the petitioners relied upon Gurnam Singh and others v. State of Punjab and others, 1999(2) AICLR 646; Kulbir Singh v. State of Punjab, 1999(2) RCR (Criminal) 592; Shri Vivek ChandSharma v. The State of Haryana, 1996(2) CLJ(Criminal) 376;Mohin-der Kaur v. State of Punjab, 1995(3) RCR (Criminal) 471; Bhajan Lal and others v. State of Haryana and others, 1990(2) RCR (Criminal) 515; Bharatlnder Singh Chahal v. State of Punjab, 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 427 and Pulavar B.M. Senguttuvan v. State, 2004(2) RCR (Criminal) 805. 1. Keeping in view the authoritative pronouncement in D.K. Wasu v. State of West Bengal, 1997(1) R.C.R.(Criminal) 372 : AIR 1997SC 610, it is ordered that if the petitioners are required in any cognizable case, the guidelines framed in the D.K. Wasu's case (supra) and provisions of Section 160 Cr.P.C. be complied with. It is directed that in case the petitioners are required in any cognizable offence, they shall be served with advance notice of seven days. Petitioners No. 1 and 2 being a lady and minor girl will not be called to the police station. If the police wants to question them, they shall be questioned at their residence. 8. With the above directions, this petition stands disposed of. This order will be operative for three years only. Petition disposed of.