Ashok Bhushan, Ag.CJ Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned State Attorney. No notice need be issued to respondent No.4 in view of the order which is being passed. 2. By this writ petition, the petitioner had prayed for a mandamus directing respondents 2 and 3 to provide adequate police protection to the life of the petitioner. The petitioner had submitted a complaint dated 28.8.2014 against the fourth respondent.
3. Learned State Attorney after getting instructions submits that the fourth respondent was summoned on 4.9.2014 and has been warned. He further submits that no further incident has taken place and further there is no threat to the petitioner.
In view of the aforesaid submission, we see no reason to WP(C) No.26295/14 2 continue the writ petition any further. The writ petition is closed. It is observed that it is open for the petitioner to give complaint to the Station House Officer if any untoward incident takes place.
Sd/-
ASHOK BHUSHAN, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/-
A.M.SHAFFIQUE, JUDGE.
sou.