Raju v. The State (N.C.T Of Delhi) & ORS

$~11 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(CRL) 1882/2016 RAJU ..... Petitioner Through : Mr. A.N. Jha, Adv.

versus THE STATE (N.C.T OF DELHI) & ORS ..... Respondents Through : Mr. Rajesh Mahajan, ASC

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. PATHAK

O R D E R

% 18.07.2016 Petitioner has prayed in this writ petition that respondent nos. 1 and 2 be directed to provide protection to the petitioner at his temporary address, that is, M-79, Fourth Floor Left Side, Batla House, Jamia Nagar, New Delhi - 110025. Petitioner has alleged that one Ms. Rekha was her friend. Ms. Rekha informed the petitioner that respondent no. 3 married her with one Vijay Gupta on 9th May, 2016 against her wishes, despite the fact that she was minor. Ms. Rekha left the house and sought help of the petitioner. Ms. Rekha also wrote a letter dated 28th May, 2016 to the Chief Justice of India stating therein her plight. Petitioner arranged a tenanted accommodation for Ms. Rekha. She filed WP (Crl.) No. 1829/2016 in this Court, which was

disposed of vide order dated 2nd June, 2016. In the said writ petition, Ms. Rekha was sent to Child Welfare Committee (CWC), CPWD Barracks, Kalkaji, New Delhi. Petitioner alleges that he apprehends threat to his life from the respondent no. 3.

Status report has been filed by the respondent no. 2. In the status report, it has been admitted that writ petition was filed by Ms. Rekha and she has been sent to CWC vide order dated 2nd June, 2016. Ms. Rekha was got medically examined and she was found pregnant. CWC informed the parents of the girl on 6th June, 2016. Ms. Rekha was counselled. During the counselling, Ms. Rekha stated that her parents used to beat her and keep her confined in home, inasmuch as stopped sending her to the school and had also married her with one Vijay Gupta against her wishes. Ms. Rekha refused to go with her parents and presently she is staying in Prayas Shelter Home. It is further stated that there is no imminent threat to the petitioner, however, beat staff of the area has been sensitized and asked to remain in touch with the petitioner on regular basis. Telephone numbers of beat staff, Division Officer and SHO have also been provided to the petitioner. Learned Additional Standing Counsel submits that petitioner may contact them in case of any threat to his life.

He further submits that beat staff

would continue to visit the petitioner's temporary address and remain in touch with him.

In view of the above facts, this writ petition is disposed of with the directions to respondent no. 2 to ensure the safety of petitioner through the beat staff.

A.K. PATHAK, J.

JULY 18, 2016 rb