Punjab and Haryana High Court
CRWP/7701/2026 of PRAHALAD SHARDA Vs STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS on 2 July 2026
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 115 CRWP-7701-2026 Date of Decision: 02.07.2026 Prahalad Sharda …Petitioner V/s State of Punjab and others …Respondents CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAM AGGARWAL Present: Mr. Gagandeep Singh Sirphikhi, Advocate, for the
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CRWP-7701-2026
Date of Decision: 02.07.2026
Prahalad Sharda
…Petitioner
V/s State of Punjab and others
…Respondents
CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAM AGGARWAL Present: Mr. Gagandeep Singh Sirphikhi, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. Ravinder Singh, DAG, Punjab. *** VIKRAM AGGARWAL, J (ORAL)
Prayer in the present petition filed under Section under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India is for the issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing respondents No.2 and 3 (Director General of Police, Punjab and Commissioner of Police, Amritsar) to protect the life and liberty of the petitioner endangered at the hands of respondents No.4 and 5.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a suit for injunction filed by the petitioner along with other persons against respondent No.5 and two other persons was decreed vide judgment and decree dated 12.12.2023 (Annexure P-1) passed by the Court of Civil Judge (Jr. Divn.), Amritsar. He submits that despite the same, efforts are being made to forcibly dispossess the petitioner despite the fact that respondent No.5 is not the landlord of the petitioner. He further submits that representation (Annexure P-2) had been submitted to respondent No.3 in 2024. He further submits that an application under Order 39 Rule 2A CPC has also been filed against respondent No.5.
VIKAS CHANDER 2026.07.02 17.23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CRWP-7701-2026
3. Learned counsel further submits that on 17.06.2026 also, he has submitted a representation (Annexure P-4) to respondents No.2 and 3 which has also evoked no response.
4. Learned State counsel submits that pursuant to the receipt of the said representations, the petitioner was called to the police station but he did not appear.
5. To this, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since the petitioner has levelled allegations against the Station House Officer of the concerned police station, no useful purpose would be served by his going to the police station and he prays that a direction be issued either to respondent No.2 or respondent No.3 to examine his representations.
6. Keeping in view the totality of the facts and circumstances as delineated above, the instant petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.3 (Commissioner of Police, Amritsar) to look into the matter in so far as the life and personal liberty of the petitioner is concerned and the representation (Annexure P-4), in accordance with law. If any action is warranted after such examination, the same be also taken as per law.
Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of.
(VIKRAM AGGARWAL)
JUDGE July 02, 2026 vcgarg
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable
: Yes/No VIKAS CHANDER 2026.07.02 17.23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document