IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 17.12.2024 Manmeet Kaur ...Petitioner Versus The State of UT Chandigarh ... Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.S.SHEKHAWAT Present : Mr. Mayank Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. Akashdeep Singh, Spl. P.P., U.T., Chandigarh.

N.S.SHEKHAWAT , J. (Oral)

1. The petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. with a prayer to quash the impugned FIR No. 96 dated 03.12.2021 under Sections 269 IPC and Section 51 of Disaster Management Act, 2005, Police Station Sector 49, Chandigarh (Annexure P-3) and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner is employed as an international civil servant with the United Nations for the last several years and is presently posted in Thailand where she looks after the affairs of United Nations World Food Programme. On 29.11.2021, the petitioner had to travel from Johannesburg (South Africa) to India for her winter holidays and as such she has departed from there on the same day. Due to outbreak of Covid 19 Pandemic, no direct flights to India were available and the petitioner had to change several flights from different countries, before she finally landed at IGI Airport, Delhi in the early hours of 01.12.2021. The petitioner was required to get the Covid RT-PCR test conducted before entering and before leaving every country’s airport, where she had to transit before reaching India. During this period, the petitioner had consistently tested negative in each Covid RT-PCR test. Due to her transfer from South Africa to India, when the petitioner landed at Delhi, no Covid RT-PCR test was conducted by the airport authorities. She was only informed by the authorities that she was required to self monitor herself for any symptoms of Covid-19 infection and no directions were issued to quarantine herself at her home. Learned counsel further contends that on 01.12.2021, the petitioner boarded another flight to Chandigarh and reached there. She again informed the authorities regarding the directions of self monitoring, which were given to her by the concerned authorities at IGI Airport Delhi. Again, no Covid RT-PCR test was conducted on the petitioner at the airport in Mohali. She was made to sign an undertaking, wherein, she was asked to circle the option of self monitoring in accordance to the directions received by the petitioner from the authorities at IGI Airport, Delhi. The petitioner was not provided the copy of the said undertaking. Again she got herself tested for Covid 19 and she was tested negative. She informed the authorities that she intended to stay in Chandigarh only for a few days and also wanted to check into a hotel after a brief visit to her parents. She informed the health officials that she had opted for self monitoring of the health and on 02^nd December 2021, the Covid RT-PCR test results of the petitioner were declared to be negative. She was under the bonafide impression that she was only to do the self monitoring of her health and she checked into a hotel. Even, at no stage, any airport/health officials had directed the petitioner to quarantine herself for any period of time. Even, she was already tested negative repeatedly and on 02^nd December 2021, she went out of her hotel to take dinner. At that stage, the petitioner was informed by health authorities that she had to quarantine herself for a period of 08 days. On the next day, i.e., 03^rd December 2021, they came to the hotel and quarantined the petitioner in the general ward of Government Hospital, Sector 16 Chandigarh and the present FIR (Annexure P-3) was ordered to be registered against the petitioner. On 08^th December 2021, again the test was conducted for checking the infection of Covid-19 and the result was again declared to be negative. Consequently, the petitioner was released from the hospital. 3. Learned counsel further contends that now without any