Rajni And ANR v. State Of Haryana And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRWP-44-2020 Date of Decision:-7.1.2020 RAJNI AND ANR ... Petitioners

Versus

STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS ... Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL Present:- Mr. Kuldeep Singh, Advocate for the petitioners.

Ms. Aditi Girdhar, AAG, Haryana for respondents No.1 to 3.

Mr. Abhishek, Advocate for respondents No.4 and 5.

GURVINDER SINGH GILL, J. (Oral) 1.

The petitioners who claim themselves to be major have approached this Court seeking protection of their lives as they apprehend threat to the same, having married against the wishes of their parents and relatives. 2.

Rajinder Kumar son of Kurdia Ram, Balbir Kumar son of Narshing, Golu son of Rajinder Kumar, Ravi son of Dharam Pal, Reena wife of Pardeep Kumar, Neelam wife of Sucha Singh, Sonu son of Gurdev Singh, Sunil son of Desh Raj, Sourav son of Satish Kumar, Rajinder son of Satish Kumar and Saroj Bala wife of Phool Chand are present in the Court. The learned counsel for respondents No.4 and 5 has requested that Neelam wife of Sucha Singh may be permitted to meet petitioner No.1-Rajni for a short while. 3.

Acceding to the aforesaid request, the aforesaid Neelam was permitted to have a word with petitioner No.1-Rajni for a short while during lunch time. When the matter was again taken up in post-lunch session, the petitioner GAURAV SOROT 2020.01.07 16:15 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

( -:2:- ) CRWP-44-2020 No.1 expressed that she does not wish to go with her parents. Consequently all the relatives of petitioner No.1, who are present in Court were advised not to cause any harm to the petitioners and not to take law in their hands and maintain peace.

4.

The learned counsel for respondents No.4 and 5 has assured that respondents No.4 and 5 or any of their relatives will not harm the petitioners in any manner.

5.

While refraining from making any expression as regards the veracity of the averments made in the petition, the petition is disposed of with a direction that in case the petitioners approach the police authorities concerned by way of filing a detailed representation with regard to their alleged threat perception, the same shall be got examined by Superintendent of Police, Yamunanagar (respondent No.2), expeditiously in accordance with law and necessary steps as may be warranted under the facts and circumstances of the case be taken thereupon forthwith.

6.

A copy of this order be sent to Superintendent of Police, Yamunanagar (respondent No.2), so as to enable him to do the needful expeditiously. 7.

It is however, clarified that the aforesaid order shall not be construed to be an expression as regards validity of the alleged marriage of the parties. ( GURVINDER SINGH GILL) 7.1.2020 JUDGE Gaurav Sorot Whether reasoned / speaking?

Yes / No Whether reportable?

Yes / No GAURAV SOROT 2020.01.07 16:15 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document