Smt. Shashi Prajapati v. The State & ORS.

$~8 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 1264/2020 SMT. SHASHI PRAJAPATI ..... Petitioner Through : Mr.Vibudh Singh, Advocate.

versus THE STATE & ORS. ..... Respondents Through : Mr.Sanjay Lao, ASC for respondents No.1 to 6.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YOGESH KHANNA

O R D E R

% 19.08.2020 1.

The hearing has been conducted through Video Conferencing. Crl.M.A.No.11184/2020 2.

Exemption allowed, subject to the condition that petitioner will file the duly sworn/attested affidavit within 72 hours from the date of resumption of the regular functioning of this Court. 3.

The application stands disposed of.

Crl.M.A.No.11183/2020 4.

Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. 5.

The application stands disposed of.

W.P.(CRL) 1264/2020 6.

This writ petition is filed with the following prayers:- "a) to issue the Writ of Prohibitio; Mandamus and / or any other Writs or orders may be issued to proect the lives and properties of the petitioner, her husband Sh.Deepak Kumar and her in-laws from the cruel hands of Respondents No.07-18 and their Associates; and b) also police protection may be provided to the petitioner, her Husband and her in - Laws as their safety measures; and c) also restrain the Respondents No.07-18 and their associates to enter into the periphery of 100 meters of the petitioner, her Husband and her in -laws and d) also Respondent No.1 may be directed to take appropriate legal action against the Respondent No.07-18 and their associates in the interest of justice."

SHARMA

7.

It is the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner herein married one Deepak on 24.07.2020, which is the cause of concern for her family members who are respondents No.7 - 18. It is alleged the relatives/ respondents No.7 - 18 belong to Un-urban Prajapati community and they are not happy with the marriage of petitioner with Deepak and they have threatened the couple with dire consequences. 8.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted though the petitioner has given the address of her father and also provided her in-laws address of District Kannoj, Uttar Pradesh; as due to threats she is hiding herself with her husband within the area of North-East District, Delhi, as is employed with HDFC Bank in Delhi, does not wish to disclose her address owing to threat perception to anyone.

9.

Let the petitioner appear before the DCP, North-East District, Delhi within seven days from today and get recorded her statement. The DCP concerned shall assess the threat perception to the petitioner and her husband and would provide adequate security to them, as the circumstances may so desire. The address where the petitioner is presently residing shall not be disclosed by the DCP concerned to anyone else. 10.

The petitioner is satisfied with the observations made above. 11.

In view of above, the petition stands disposed of. No order as to costs.

YOGESH KHANNA, J.

AUGUST 19, 2020 AT SHARMA