SAPNA AND ANOTHER vs STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS — CRWP/4232/2026

Disposed: --DISPOSED OF on 10th April 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: PHHC010618202026

Filing Number

CRWP/27966/2026

Filing Date

10-Apr-2026

Registration No

CRWP/4232/2026

Registration Date

10-Apr-2026

Judge

Mr. Justice Surya Partap Singh

Coram

Mr. Justice Surya Partap Singh

Category

47.5 - PROTECTION ( 195 )

Judicial Branch

CRIMINAL BRANCH

Decision Date

10-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

--DISPOSED OF

Last updated 12-May-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SAPNA AND ANOTHER

    Adv. MANJEET SAINI

  2. 2.SAPNA

  3. 3.ASHU ABBASI

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

  2. 2.SAPNA

  3. 3.ASHU ABBASI

  4. 4.SHO (Station House Officer) CITY NUH

  5. 5.BACHCHU SINGH

  6. 6.BHANO

  7. 7.ISLAM

  8. 8.AANAND

  9. 9.GORI SHANKAR

  10. 10.MANOJ

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 10-Apr-2026

    Mr. Justice Surya Partap SinghView PDF

    Summary The High Court of Punjab and Haryana disposed of the petition with a direction to the Superintendent of Police, Nuh (respondent No.2) to decide the petitioners' representation within 15 days by passing a reasoned order. The court directed that petitioners be provided requisite safety and security to protect their life and liberty if required, while clarifying that the police authority retains independent discretion to assess threat perception and determine whether security is necessary. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 10-Apr-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRWP/4232/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The High Court of Punjab and Haryana disposed of the petition with a direction to the Superintendent of Police, Nuh (respondent No.2) to decide the petitioners' representation within 15 days by passing a reasoned order. The court directed that petitioners be provided requisite safety and security to protect their life and liberty if required, while clarifying that the police authority retains independent discretion to assess threat perception and determine whether security is necessary. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case