Swati & ANR v. Commissioner Of Police & ORS

$~33 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(CRL) 1217/2016 SWATI & ANR ..... Petitioners Through:

Mr. Sanjay Dewan and Ms. Palak Rohmetra, Advs.

versus COMMISSIONER OF POLICE & ORS ..... Respondents Through:

Mr. Rahul Mehra, Standing Counsel with Mr. Jamal Akhtar, Adv. along with SI Ramesh Kumar, P.S. Sultan Puri.

Mr. Pradeep Kumar Arya and Ms.

Sarika Soam, Advs. for R-4 to R-9 along with R-4 in person.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. PATHAK

O R D E R

% 15.12.2016 Respondent no. 4 is father of petitioner no.1; whereas respondent nos. 5 to 9 are other relatives of respondent no.4. Petitioners have approached this Court by way of present writ petition seeking police protection. It is submitted that petitioner no.1 has married petitioner no.2 at Arya Samaj Temple, Jaiom Nagar, Delhi on 7th April, 2016 of her own free will and without the consent of her family members. Petitioners have alleged that after the marriage they started receiving threats. Vide order dated 22nd April, 2016 respondent no. 1 was directed to provide necessary protection to the petitioners through SHO concerned after

assessing the element of threat, if any. It was further ordered that respondent no.1 shall also ensure that mobile numbers of concerned SHO/beat constable are provided to the petitioners to enable them to contact on these mobile numbers if necessity arises. Learned Standing Counsel for the State submits that beat staff has already been sensitized in terms of the directions as contained in the order dated 22nd April, 2016, inasmuch as, mobile numbers of the SHO and the beat staff have also been provided to the petitioners. He further submits that no threat is there to the lives of the petitioners from the respondent nos. 4 to 9. It is further submitted that SI Ramesh Kumar of police station Sultan Puri has talked to the father of the petitioner no.2 today itself and he is informed that there is no threat to the lives of the petitioners. Learned counsel for the respondent nos. 4 to 9 submits that these respondents have never threatened the petitioners nor have any intention to do so in the future.

He further submits that respondent nos. 4 and 5 along with Smt. Bhagwati had filed a suit bearing CS No. 80/2016 before the Civil Judge (West-III), Tis Hazari, Delhi against the petitioners wherein counsel for the petitioners has made a statement, on instructions, that petitioners would not enter the premises of respondent nos. 4 and 5 nor will claim any articles, as mentioned in para 3 of the affidavit. It is further submitted that

in view of this statement, respondent nos. 4 and 5 withdrew the said suit. It is further submitted that respondent no. 4 has already handed over all the original documents, i.e., academic, educational as well as certificates and all the four identity cards, i.e., Driving Licence, Aadhar Card, Voter ID Card and Pan Card of the petitioner no.1 to the counsel for the petitioners, who was representing them before the Civil Judge. In view of the above, writ petition is disposed of by confirming the interim order dated 22nd April, 2016.

A.K. PATHAK, J.

DECEMBER 15, 2016 ga