20.02.2025 JAGRAJ SINGH SIDHU … v. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS
Case Details
301 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRWP-1405-2025 Date of Decision: 20.02.2025 JAGRAJ SINGH SIDHU ….Petitioner(s) VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS ….Respondent(s)
Legal Reasoning
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH Present: Mr. Lakhwinder Singh Sidhu, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Amandeep Singh, DAG, Punjab. **** SANJAY VASHISTH , J. (Oral) 1. Petitioner – Jagraj Singh, who actually resides in Canada since the year 2011, has filed the instant petition for issuance of direction to official respondents (Punjab police department) to ensure the protection of his life and liberty from the hands of unknown persons/anti-social elements, by providing adequate police security to him, till the time he stays here in India. 2. After examining of the petition and on hearing counsel for the petitioner, on 14.02.2025 following order was passed by this Court:- “1. Present petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking direction to the official respondents to ensure the protection of his life and liberty from the hands of unknown persons/anti-social elements, by providing police security to him. SANGEETA 2025.02.24 16:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRWP-1405-2025 2 2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is residing in Canada, and presently, has landed back to his own country i.e. India. Counsel for the petitioner points out that earlier also, similar protection petition was filed, but same being incompetent, was dismissed, however, on being granted liberty to file a fresh one, present petition is being filed. Counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner requires an adequate police security during the time when he is in India, as per the schedule i.e. up till March 4, 2025, the day when he was to fly back to Canada. Further submits that petitioner is a CEO/Managing Director of the Radio Station namely Mehak Radio and TV Channel, which is one of the leading radio in South Asia Media and Overseas. In the year 2011, he had conducted the interview of former Director General of Police, Punjab, namely, Sh. KPS Gill, on his radio station, wherein certain discussions on the topic of Terrorism in Punjab, its revival and involvement of Sikh youth etc. were made. And immediately, after airing of said interview, petitioner started receiving threats. In this regard in paragraph Nos 3 and 4 of the present petition, petitioner highlighted the instances of the year 2011 only. Counsel for the petitioner further relies upon the order dated 11.01.2013, vide which he had been provided security under the orders of ADGP Security, when he visited India during that period. 3. Feeling apprehensive of his life, for the said instances which have been pointed out in the present petition, petitioner has filed instant petition, for providing protection to him uptill 04.03.2025. 4. Notice of motion. 5. On advance notice, Mr. Amandeep Singh Samra, AAG, Punjab, puts an appearance on behalf of the respondent/State and prays for grant of some time to file status report and response to the petition as well as the contentions addressed by counsel for the petitioner today before this Court. List again on 19.02.2025. 6. Let amended memo of parties be filed by counsel for the 7. petitioner in the Registry, by showing the petitioner's address of Canada as well as of India.” SANGEETA 2025.02.24 16:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRWP-1405-2025 3 3. Today, learned DAG Punjab, files status report dated 18.02.2025, which is in the shape of notarized affidavit of Deputy Superintendent of Police, Dharamkot, District Moga, namely Ramandeep Singh, PPS, the same is taken on record. Copy thereof has been forwarded to counsel for the petitioner. 4. After granting opportunity to go through the status report, counsel requested to argue the petition today itself. 5. The response which has been mentioned in paragraph No.3 of the status report, is reproduced hereunder:- “3. That in compliance of said order, it is submitted that after getting the copy of instant petition as well as order, the investigation was got conducted through ASI Nachhttar Singh. During investigation, number of times, ASI Nachhattar Singh visited village Khosa Kotla, District Moga, and every time petitioner was not found present there. ASI Nachhattar Singh also contacted with the petitioner through phone, but instead of joining the investigation petitioner misbehaved him and directed him to police should have to depute gunmen at their house to protect his properties. It is also submitted her that mother of petitioner had also filed a petition no. CRWP No. 756 of 2024 before this Hon'ble Court. In said petition mother of petitioner got recorded her statement with the police that her son Jagraj Singh is running his Radio Channel "Mehak" in Canada and said Jagraj Singh is receiving threat Calls in Canada. She further stated that she is in India and she is having apprehension to her life and liberty and she is in need of 6 gunmen. Mother of petitioner has also produced the copy of her air ticket, from which it is clear that she came to India on 31.01.2025 and she has to return to Canada on 04.03.2025. During investigation it is also found that no threat call has been received by the petitioner since 31.01.2025 (date of arrival in India). However, as answering respondents are duty bound to protect the life and liberty of every inhabitant, so necessary directions have been issued PCR/Rural Rapid to increase the patrolling towards the residential house of petitioner situated in village Khosa Kotla, SANGEETA 2025.02.24 16:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRWP-1405-2025 4 District Moga. Apart from this the phone number of SHO, Police Station Kot Ise Khan has also been provided to the petitioner, so that in case of any type of apprehension to her life and liberty she can contact the SHO, PS Kot Ise Khan without any hesitation.” 6. On the very outset, learned DAG, Punjab, clarifies that inadvertently, in status report, some facts have been mentioned pertaining to the mother of the petitioner, however, same pertains to petitioner, thus, same be treated as information being supplied by the petitioner only. 7. First of all, it is observed that as per status report, behaviour and conduct of the petitioner with the police officials is completely unwarranted. 8. Be that as it may, since the time of his arrival in Inida i.e. 31.01.2025, as per investigation, no threat or any call in that regard, has never been received by the petitioner. 9. Still, realising its duty in law, a conscious decision has also been taken by the respondents/police department, to protect the life and liberty of its all inhabitants in the State and accordingly, necessary directions have also been issued to PCR/Rural rapid, to increase the patrolling towards the residential house of the petitioner situated in Village Khosa Kotla, District Moga. 10. Even SHO concerned, of Police Station Kot Isse Khan, has provide his own contact/phone number so that at the time of need, SHO can be contacted without any hesitation. 11. Dissatisfied with the reply filed by the State, petitioner submits that in the intervening night of 16/17.02.2025 at about 1:00 AM (during night), some unwarranted people entered in the house of the SANGEETA 2025.02.24 16:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRWP-1405-2025 5 petitioner and in that regard a complaint has been made to SSP, Moga, and said part is missing in the status report. 12. Counsel for the petitioner submits that CCTV footage in that regard is also available and same can be presented to the office of SSP, Moga also. 13. Considering the apprehension of the petitioner and the reply
Decision
submitted by the State, present petition is hereby disposed of by observing that petitioner would prepare a recording of the CCTV footage in pen-drive and the same would be handed over to the respondent (in the office of respondent No.4-Senior Superintendent of Police, Moga, Tehsil and District Moga) and thereupon, same would be seen/examined by the concerned officer of the police, who would be deputed by the Senior Superintendent of Police. 14. In case, some truth is found in the CCTV footage, the version of which is recorded in the pen-drive, required steps would be taken to ensure the life and liberty of the petitioner. February 20, 2025 Sangeeta (SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE Whether reasoned/speaking: Whether reportable: Yes/No Yes/No SANGEETA 2025.02.24 16:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document