SIMREET KAUR v. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS
Case Details
CRWP-2642-2025(O&M) - 1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 230 CRWP-2642-2025(O&M) Decided on : 25.09.2025 SIMREET KAUR . . . Petitioner(s) Versus STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS . . . Respondent(s)
Legal Reasoning
CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE KIRTI SINGH PRESENT: Mr. Sandeep S. Majithia, Advocate for the petitioner(s). Ms. Aakanksha Gupta, AAG Punjab. **** KIRTI SINGH , J. (Oral) 1. The present petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India has been filed for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the official respondents to protect the life and liberty of the petitioner and her family members from the hands of respondents No.4 to 11, who are pressurizing the petitioner to withdraw the complaint dated 11.03.2025, which was handed over to SSP office vide Diary No.181-PC Camp dated 11.03.2025. 2. On 28.05.2025, the following order was passed by this Court- “The present petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India has been filed for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the official respondents to protect the life and liberty of the petitioner and her family members from the hands of respondents No.4 to 11, who are pressurizing the petitioner to withdraw the complaint dated 11.03.2025, which was handed over to SSP office vide Diary No.181-PC Camp dated 11.03.2025. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner 2. was married to Jagdeep Singh (since deceased). On earlier occasion petitioner had complained to her husband and brother-in- law that respondent No.4 was having an evil eye upon her and use KAVITA NAIN 2025.09.26 16:53 I agree to specified portions of this document CRWP-2642-2025(O&M) - 2- to tease her and used filthy language. The petitioner and her husband complained about the behavior of respondent No.4 to his family members, however, they supported the acts of respondent No.4 on 15.01.2025. The petitioner and her husband were attacked by respondents No.4, 5 and 8 to 11. After a few days some unknown persons with muffled faces, who were armed with swords and bricks attacked at the house of the petitioner. Learned counsel further submits that on 04.03.2025 at about 10: am while the petitioner along with her husband and some relatives were going towards Police Station City Tarn Taran, two unidentified persons who were acting upon the instance of the private respondents fired at them due to which the husband of the petitioner fell down from the motorcycle and succumbed to injuries. Notice of motion. 3. 4. At the asking of the Court, Ms. Guramrit Kaur, DAG, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of respondent(s)-State and prays for time to file response. Adjourned to 25.07.2025. 5. 6. The SSP Tarn Taran, is also directed to look into the matter and assess the threat perception, and shall provide the adequate protection, if so required.” 3. In compliance of above said order, status report dated 24.07.2025 has already been filed by learned State counsel. Learned State counsel, on instructions, and while relying on the contents of the said status report, submits that with respect to the passing away of the husband, an FIR No.48/2025 was promptly registered, whereinunder statement of the petitioner was recorded by the investigating officer on 08.03.2025, whereafter three persons were nominated as an accused. Investigation in the said case is underway, and appropriate action would be taken by the investigating agency in accordance with law. It is further submitted that pursuant to the order of this Court dated 28.05.2025, the threat perception of the petitioner was duly verified by the Superintendent of Police, SDPO-City Tarn Taran. During the course of verification, the statement of the petitioner was recorded, wherein she categorically stated as under: KAVITA NAIN 2025.09.26 16:53 I agree to specified portions of this document CRWP-2642-2025(O&M) - 3- “I am a resident of the above address and used to do domestic work. I had a relationship with Jagdeep Singh alias Mola, son of Kuldeep Singh, resident of Jamastpur in the year 2024. On 05.03.2025, my husband Jagdeep Singh alias Mola son of Kuldeep Singh, resident of Jamastpur, had gone for some work on a motorcycle with my uncle's son Rachpal Singh alias Rinku, son of Baldev Singh, resident of Mohalla Tank Kastri, Tarn Taran. When my husband Jagdeep Singh alias Mola and my uncle's son Rachpal Singh alias Rinku reached near Sri Darbar Sahib on their way back, then Baljinder Singh alias Bobby, Sunny son of Jagir Singh Babbu son of Kewal Singh, resident of Jamastpur, Kuldeep Kaur wife of Jagir Singh, Jagir Singh son of Jaswant Singh, Happy son of Dalbir Singh, resident of Jamastpur, Goldy son of Dara Singh, resident of Tarn Taran, Ashwani Kumar alias Saifi son of Narinder Singh, resident of Tarn Taran, Buta Singh son of Mahinder Singh, resident of Tarn Taran had surrounded my husband Jagdeep Singh on the road and shot him dead. In this regard, case FIR No.48/25 was registered at Police Station City Tarn Taran. A month ago, I received a call from Ranjit Singh on my mobile phone. He told me that you have registered a case against our relatives Bobby and others, in connection with which we want to compromise with you. In this regard, I went to the office of SSP, Tarn Taran and moved a complaint. Now, neither I have received a call nor I have received a message from Bobby's sister Pooja on my Instagram ID, to which I have not replied. I am not having any threat from anyone. Statement recorded before you, heard and same is true." It is further submitted that statements of brother-in-law of petitioner and respectables of the village were also recorded, and upon due assessment, it was found that no imminent threat exists to the life or liberty of the petitioner. Nevertheless, as a precaution, directions have been issued to the local police to conduct regular patrolling in the area of the petitioner and to ensure her safety. KAVITA NAIN 2025.09.26 16:53 I agree to specified portions of this document CRWP-2642-2025(O&M) - 4- 4. In light of the status report filed on behalf of the State, no further
Decision
directions are called for at this stage, and the petition is accordingly disposed of. 5. However, in case any fresh cause of action arises, the petitioner shall be at a liberty to approach the concerned authorities, who shall take appropriate action in accordance with law. 25.09.2025 Kavita Whether speaking/reasoned: Whether Reportable: Yes/No Yes/No (KIRTI SINGH) JUDGE KAVITA NAIN 2025.09.26 16:53 I agree to specified portions of this document