Punjab and Haryana High Court
CRWP/8682/2026 of MANDEEP Vs STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS on 21 July 2026
IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH 112 CRWP-8682-2026 (O&M) Date of Decision: 21.07.2026 MANDEEP ... PETITIONER VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS ... RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIRINDER AGGARWAL Present: Mr. Vineet Kumar Jakhar, Advocate, with Mr. Mohit Thakur,
IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT
CHANDIGARH
Date of Decision: 21.07.2026
MANDEEP
... PETITIONER
VERSUS
STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS
... RESPONDENTS
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIRINDER AGGARWAL
Present:
Mr. Vineet Kumar Jakhar, Advocate, with
Mr. Mohit Thakur, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. Karan Veer Singh, Sr. DAG, Haryana.
****
VIRINDER AGGARWAL, J. (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 present petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing respondent No.1 to 4 to protect the life and liberty of the petitioner and his family from the hands of respondents No.5 to 10.
2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that respondents No. 5 to 10 are exerting undue pressure upon the petitioner to settle the dispute with private respondent No. 10. It is further submitted that, with this objective, the petitioner was called to the police station, where he was allegedly detained illegally in the lock-up. According to the petitioner, he was released after some time with a warning that, in the event he failed to settle the matter with respondent No. 10, he would have to face dire consequences.
3. After arguing for some time, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has already submitted a representation to the Senior Superintendent of Police, Panchkula, Haryana, and the Director General of Police, Haryana, seeking registration of a criminal case, including an FIR, and initiation of appropriate departmental action against respondents No. 6 to 9. It is further submitted that the petitioner would be satisfied if a direction is issued to respondent No. 3–Superintendent of Police, Panchkula, Haryana, to consider SAURAV PATHANIA 2026.07.22 16:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document and decide the representation dated 18.07.2026 (Annexure P-5) in accordance with law.
3. Notice of motion to official respondents only.
4. Mr. Karan Veer Singh, learned Sr. DAG, Haryana who is present in Court, accepts notice on behalf of the official respondents and submits that needful would be done in due course.
5. Keeping in view the limited prayer made by petitioner, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.3-Senior Superintendent of Police, Panchkula, Haryana to decide the representation dated 18.07.2026 (Annexure P-5) submitted by petitioner within a period of four weeks’ from today by passing a reasoned and speaking order, in accordance with law and take appropriate action, if so required.
6. In the meantime, CCTV footage of police station Uchana dated 09.07.2026 be kept preserved.
6. However, if, respondent No.3 does not find any substance in the allegations levelled in the representation, the petitioner shall be informed as per mandate of law.
7. Petition stands disposed of.
8. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, stand disposed of. (VIRINDER AGGARWAL) 21.07.2026
JUDGE S. Pathania Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No SAURAV PATHANIA 2026.07.22 16:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document