Safiya Malik

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana Single Bench of Justice Harpreet Singh Brar directed the States of Haryana and Punjab to formulate a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) to tackle the threat of organized gangster activity, particularly extortion rackets. The Court issued the direction while hearing a petition seeking protection of life and liberty due to continuous threats from a known gangster. The Bench directed the concerned States and the Union of India to submit suggestions and inputs, by way of affidavits, to aid in the creation of a coordinated, multi-agency, and technology-enabled response mechanism. The Court also appointed an Amicus Curiae and instructed that appropriate action be taken by State authorities on the petitioner’s representations.

The writ petition was filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the concerned State authorities to provide immediate protection to the petitioner and his family members. The petitioner alleged that he had received repeated threats from Rohit Godara, a known gangster allegedly affiliated with the Lawrence Bishnoi gang. According to the petition, extortion demands initially amounting to ₹2 crore were subsequently increased to ₹5 crore, and specific threats to the petitioner’s children and family were conveyed through calls and letters.

Also Read: Supreme Court Quashes Criminal Case Against HDFC Manager: 'No Role in Auction Process' I 'Continuation of Proceedings Would Be Abuse of Process and Cause Miscarriage of Justice'

The petitioner submitted documents evidencing the threats, marked as Annexures P-1 to P-3. He also presented multiple representations made to government authorities, marked as Annexures P-4 to P-6, urging them to initiate criminal proceedings and offer protection. Despite these representations and the first reported call having occurred on 1 April 2024, the petitioner claimed that no First Information Report (FIR) had been registered by the concerned authorities as of the date of the hearing.

The case highlighted the failure of law enforcement agencies to respond promptly to credible threats of extortion and physical harm. The petitioner contended that inaction by the authorities not only endangered his life but also reflected a larger systemic failure in countering gang-related threats and criminal enterprises operating across state borders.

During the hearing, senior government counsels appeared on behalf of the States of Haryana and Punjab, as well as for the Union of India. The learned Advocate General for Haryana gave an assurance that the petitioner’s grievances would be attended to promptly. The Court took serious note of the allegations and the delay in registering an FIR despite repeated complaints and imminent threats.

The matter was treated as reflective of a larger issue beyond individual protection, namely the growing threat of organized gangster networks, their cross-border operations, and the increasing normalization of criminal behavior in the public sphere. In light of the nature of threats and extortion practices revealed in the petition, the Court determined that systemic intervention through coordinated policy action was warranted.

Accordingly, the Court requested the Advocate Generals of Haryana and Punjab, along with the Additional Solicitor General of India, to assist in framing a robust, inter-State and inter-agency response mechanism. An Amicus Curiae was appointed to assist the Court in evaluating systemic responses to gang-related crimes and in drafting an effective SOP.

The Court observed that the petitioner and his family had been under “constant concern for their life owing to the constant threats made by Rohit Godara, a known gangster.” It stated: “It is hard to imagine the petitioner getting a good night’s sleep in the last year, owing to the immense psychological burden he has been put under.”

Noting the repeated inaction by the authorities, the Court stated: “For over a year now, the petitioner has been running from pillar to post to have an FIR registered against the culprits, however, to no avail.”

Quoting Wolfgang Friedman’s Law in a Changing Society, the Court referenced: “State of criminal law continues to be—as it should be—a decisive reflection of social consciousness of society.”

The Court acknowledged the gravity of the situation: “The State owes a duty to its citizens to ensure their safety. It is only when security and subsistence are not under threat, can a people truly make progress and build a life for themselves.”

It added: “Citizens can only be expected to contribute to the society when they live in an environment free of fear. Allowing lawlessness to propagate unchecked undermines the order, and thereby peace, painstakingly maintained by the justice administration mechanism.”

Referring to the ongoing threats, the Court reiterated: “Since 01.01.2024, the petitioner and his family have been living under constant concern for their life owing to the constant threats made by Rohit Godara.”

It highlighted broader systemic implications: “The story of the petitioner, unfortunately, is one of many. Gangster culture, particularly in the form of extortion rackets, has emerged as a significant threat to the social order in today’s time, fostering an environment of fear and lawlessness.”

The Court described how such criminality harms civil society: “The glorification of violence, the normalization of criminal behavior, and the recruitment of vulnerable youth into gangs not only perpetuate crime but erode public trust in the justice system.”

Commenting on the economic and social consequences, it observed: “Extortion, a hallmark of their operations, forces individuals and businesses to pay for ‘protection’ or face dire consequences, perpetuating a cycle of fear and lawlessness.”

“Such criminal activities not only stifle entrepreneurship, but also create a parallel economy, fostering corruption and subverting the rule of law.”

On the need for a strong institutional response, the Court stated: “A firm hand, with stringent law enforcement and legal measures, is essential to dismantling extortion rackets, deterring future criminal enterprises and safeguarding the moral fabric of society.”

“The judiciary must ensure that those who engage in such nefarious activities face the full brunt of the law, sending a strong message that such criminality will not be tolerated.”

“This will be a step towards restoring public confidence and protecting the foundations of a law-abiding society.”

The Court indicated the need for comprehensive policy reform: “In view of the discussion above, the States of Haryana and Punjab are directed to formulate a Standard Operating Procedure.”

It further acknowledged the involvement of senior legal officers: “Learned Advocate Generals for the States of Punjab and Haryana as well as learned Additional Solicitor General, who had graciously appeared in the post-lunch session, are requested to assist this Court.”

The Court required institutional contributions: “They have sought time to submit their suggestions and inputs towards creation of a uniform, coherent and comprehensive policy by the way of affidavits of the respective ADGPs (Intelligence) for the States of Punjab and Haryana.”

The High Court directed the State of Haryana and the State of Punjab to formulate a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) aimed at addressing the growing threat posed by organized gangster activity and extortion networks. The SOP is to be developed in consultation with the Advocate Generals of both States and the Additional Solicitor General of India, who appeared in the matter. These officers were asked to submit their suggestions and inputs through affidavits filed by the respective Additional Directors General of Police (Intelligence).

The Court noted that the SOP may include measures such as creation of anti-gang units with appropriate training and technological resources, surveillance of known gangsters through digital forensic science and financial tracking, and establishment of cross-border intelligence sharing mechanisms involving central agencies. It further suggested setting up of anonymous reporting channels and trust-based informant networks, introduction of a witness protection program, and the establishment of fast-track courts for prompt adjudication of gangster-related cases. The Court also directed the State counsel to inform it of the pre-existing legal frameworks applicable to the issue.

Also Read: "Faith, Trust and Confidence Eroded": High Court Upholds Dismissal of Civil Judge for "Manipulation of Records," "Truncated Proceedings," and "Violation of Judicial Integrity"

To aid the Court in assessing the adequacy of responses and the structure of the proposed SOP, Mr. Preetinder Singh Ahluwalia, Advocate, was appointed as Amicus Curiae. The Registry was instructed to supply a full copy of the case record to him during the day.

In addition to these structural directions, the Advocate General for Haryana assured the Court that the petitioner’s pending representations regarding personal threats would be promptly reviewed and that appropriate action would be taken.

The matter was adjourned to 14 May 2025 for further proceedings and to enable the concerned authorities to file the required affidavits.

Advocates Representing the Parties

For the Petitioner: Mr. Gourav Verma, Advocate.

For the Respondents: Mr. Parvindra Singh Chauhan, Advocate General, Haryana; Mr. Sukhdeep Parmar, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Haryana; Ms. Geeta Sharma, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana; Mr. M.S. Bedi, Advocate General, Punjab; Mr. Subhash Godara, Additional Advocate General, Punjab; Mr. Satya Pal Jain, Additional Solicitor General of India; Ms. Sangeeta Srivastava, Advocate for Union of India.

Case Title: Raj Veer v. State of Haryana and Others

Case Number: CRWP-4004-2025 (O&M)

Bench: Justice Harpreet Singh Brar

[Read/Download order]