Punjab and Haryana High Court
CRWP/8938/2026 of PREMJIT SINGH Vs STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS on 28 July 2026
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH (125) CRWP-8938-2026 Decided on : 28.07.2026 Date of uploading: 28.07.2026 Premjit Singh ……Petitioner(s) Versus State of Punjab and others ……Respondent(s) CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Present:- Mr. Shubham
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
(125)
CRWP-8938-2026
Decided on : 28.07.2026
Date of uploading: 28.07.2026
Premjit Singh
……Petitioner(s)
Versus
State of Punjab and others
……Respondent(s)
CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL
Present:-
Mr. Shubham Chandel, Advocate for the petitioner.
****
SUMEET GOEL, JUDGE (Oral)
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. The petition in hand has been preferred under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India with the following substantive prayer(s):- “It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that the present petition may kindly be allowed and consequently, a writ in the nature of Mandamus be issued directing the respondents No. 2 and 3 to protect the life and liberty of the present petitioner from the hands of respondents No. 4 to 8, who are continuously harassing, threatening the present petitioner and his family members with dire consequences; It may be further prayed that the direction be issued to the respondents No. 2 and 3 to direct the respondent No. 4 not to harass and humiliate the present petitioner and his family members at the instance of respondents No. 5 to 8 by calling them unnecessarily and made him sit in the police post for whole day without any reason and pressurizing the petitioner to abide the illegal demands of respondents No. 5 to 8.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner, after arguing for sometime, has limited his prayer by stating that he would be satisfied, for the nonce, if a direction is issued to respondent No.3 (Senior Superintendent of Police, Khanna, District Ludhiana) to consider and take a conscious decision on the NAVEEN NAGPAL 2026.07.28 16:27 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment HIgh Court Chandigarh
CRWP-8938-2026
P a g e | 2 representation dated 16.07.2026 made by the petitioner (copy whereof has been annexed as Annexure P-4 with the petition in hand) in a time-bound manner.
3. Notice of motion.
4. On the strength of advance copy, Mr. Adhiraj Singh, AAG, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of respondents No.1 to 3. He has urged that he has no objection in case limited prayer made by the petitioner, for decision of his representation dated 16.07.2026 (Annexure P-4), is directed for.
5. Having heard learned counsel for the rival party(s) and upon perusal of the paper-book, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the petition in hand with the following directions:
(i) Respondent No.3 (Senior Superintendent of Police, Khanna, District Ludhiana) is mandated to look into the representation (Annexure P-4) moved by the petitioner, objectively consider the grievance(s) raised therein & take ratiocinated decision thereupon within a period of 15 days from today. Said decision be conveyed to the petitioner within 7 days thereafter
(ii) No order as to costs.
(SUMEET GOEL) 28.07.2026
JUDGE Naveen
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether Reportable : Yes/No
NAVEEN NAGPAL 2026.07.28 16:27 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment HIgh Court Chandigarh