Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 753 (PNJ)

Jyoti Sharma and another v. State of Punjab

2013-06-03

PARAMJEET SINGH

body2013
Paramjeet Singh, J. (Oral);— Prayer in the present petition, filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, is for the issuance of a direction to respondent Nos. 2 and to protect the life and liberty of the petitioners from respondent Nos. 4 to 10. The petitioners assert that they are major and as there is no legal impediment, they have got married. They have already moved a representation dated 18.05.2013 (Annexure P/5) before respondent No.2 – Senior Superintendent of Police, Gurdaspur, for protecting their life and liberty. On 22.05..2013, the following order was passed by this Court:- “Instant petition has been filed seeking protection of life and liberty of the petitioners from respondents No. 4 to 10. The petitioners assert that they are major and as there is no legal impediment, they have got married. They have already moved representation dated 18.05.2013 (Annexure P-4) to respondent no.2 – Senior Superintendent of Police, Gurdaspur, for protecting their life and liberty. Learned counsel for the petitioners, after seeking instructions from petitioner no.2 states that in order to show his bonafide, petitioner no.2 will deposit a sum of Rs. 1 Lakh in the form of FDR for three years in favour of petitioner no.1. Initially, petitioner no.2 will deposit a sum of Rs. 50,000/- in the form of FDR for three years in favour of petitioner no.1 within one week and thereafter Rs.50,000/- within nine months. An affidavit of petitioner no.2 dated 22.05.2013 to the above effect has been filed in Court which is taken on record. Notice of motion for 30.05.2013. In the meanwhile, liberty is granted to the petitioners to approach respondent no.2 – Senior Superintendent of Police, Gurdaspur for protection as per instructions dated 18.8.2010 issued by the Home Department, Punjab. Petitioners may not be arrested and adequate security be provided to them, if required.” On the last date of hearing, learned counsel for the petitioners sought time to comply with the order dated 22.05.2013. Learned counsel for the petitioners states that in compliance of order dated 22.05.2013, petitioner no.2 has deposited a sum of Rs. 50,000/- in the form of FDR for three years in favour of petitioner no.1. A photocopy of receipt, filed in Court, is taken on record. In view of this, order dated 22.05.2013 passed by this Court is made absolute. Learned counsel for the petitioners states that in compliance of order dated 22.05.2013, petitioner no.2 has deposited a sum of Rs. 50,000/- in the form of FDR for three years in favour of petitioner no.1. A photocopy of receipt, filed in Court, is taken on record. In view of this, order dated 22.05.2013 passed by this Court is made absolute. However, petitioner no.2 shall comply with the undertaking furnished by him on 22.05.2013 to the extent that he will deposit another sum of Rs.50,000/- in the form of FDR for three years in favour of petitioner no.1 within nine months from today and intimation in this regard be sent to this Court. Disposed of accordingly.