Smt Muskan @ Uzma Parveen v. State & ORS

$~29 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(CRL) 3284/2016 SMT MUSKAN @ UZMA PARVEEN ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr. Vijendra Kumar, Adv. along with petitioner in person.

versus STATE & ORS ..... Respondents Through:

Mr. Rajesh Mahajan, ASC for the State with Mr. Peeyush Bhatia, Adv along with SI Deshpal, P.S. K. Puri East.

Respondent nos. 3, 4, 6 and 7 are present in person.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. PATHAK

O R D E R

% 07.02.2017 By this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, petitioner has prayed for the police protection.

It is alleged that petitioner was in love with one Shri Giriraj. Her parents, i.e., respondent nos. 3 and 4 and other respondent nos. 4 to 7 were opposed to this relationship. Date of birth of petitioner is 1st January, 1996.

She is major.

Respondent nos. 3 to 7 threatened the petitioner that in case petitioner did not marry the person of their choice they would kill her. Petitioner was left with no option but to leave her house on 20th October, 2016 due to the continuous threats and pressure extended by the respondent nos. 3 to 7. Thereafter, petitioner

married Shri Giriraj on 20th October, 2016 at Arya Samaj Mandir, Delhi. On coming to know this fact, respondent nos. 3 to 7 became furious and on 26th October, 2016 these respondents came to the matrimonial house of the petitioner and threatened to kill the petitioner and her in-laws. Accordingly, a written complaint was filed before the SHO of the police station Kalyanpuri. Copies of the complaint were sent to the higher authority for providing police protection to the petitioners. On 16th November, 2016, respondent no. 2 was directed to ensure the safety of the petitioners. Learned ASC for the State submits that beat staff has already been sensitized, inasmuch as, telephone numbers of Beat Staff, Division Officer and SHO have been provided to the petitioner. It is further submitted that beat staff is in regular touch with the petitioner and her in-laws and no complaint has been received by the petitioner regarding any threat after 16th November, 2016.

Pursuant to the notice issued to the respondent nos. 3 to 7, respondent nos. 3, 4, 6 and 7 have appeared in the Court today. Respondent no. 5, who is the younger brother of respondent no.3, is stated to be unwell, however, he is being represented through respondent nos. 3, 4, 6 and 7. These respondents submit that they have never threatened the petitioner or her in-

laws. They further submit that they have no intention to cause any harm to the petitioner or her in-laws in future.

Respondent nos. 3 and 4 submit that they had lodged a missing report at police station Loni, Ghazibad since petitioner was found missing from the house. They have now withdrawn their complaint from the said police station. In view of above facts and circumstances, present writ petition is disposed of, confirming the interim order dated 16th November, 2016. A.K. PATHAK, J.

FEBRUARY 07, 2017 ga