Rajveer Singh And ANR v. State Of Punjab And ORS

CRWP-50-2025 (O&M) -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRWP-50-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision: January 07, 2025 Rajveer Singh and another ......Petitioners

Versus

State of Punjab and others ......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ

Present:

Ms.Chetna, Advocate for the petitioners.

........

RAJESH BHARDWAJ, J.(ORAL) 1.

Present petition has been filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for directing respondents No.2 to decide the representation, dated 02.01.2025 by protecting the life and liberty of the petitioners at the hands of private respondents and not to interfere in the personal life of the petitioners at the behest of respondents No.4 to 6. 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioners states that petitioner No.1 is a widower whereas petitioner No.2 is though married but she is living separately from her husband, i.e. respondent No.4, as he is a drug addict and now both the petitioners are living together against the wishes of respondents No.4 to 6 and have sought protection to their life and liberty. They apprehend danger from respondents No.4 to 6. The petitioners have submitted a representation, dated 02.01.2025 (Annexure P-5) to respondent No.2.

3.

Notice of motion to respondents no.1 to 3-State only. MEENU 2025.01.08 10:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRWP-50-2025 (O&M) -24.

On the asking of the Court, Mr.Tarun Aggarwal, Sr.DAG, Punjab, who is present in Court, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents/State.

5.

Without entering upon an exercise to evaluate the evidentiary value of the documents placed on the file, I dispose of the petition with a direction to respondent No.2-Superintendent of Police, Ferozepur, to decide the representation (Annexure P-5) of the petitioners and grant them protection, if any threat to their life and liberty is perceived. It is clarified that this order shall not be taken to grant immunity to the petitioners from legal action for violation of law, if any, committed by them. This order would not be understood having expressed any opinion whatsoever by this Court on the validity of their live-in-relationship. January 07, 2025 ( RAJESH BHARDWAJ ) meenuss JUDGE 1.

Whether speaking/reasoned ?

Yes/No 2.

Whether reportable ?

Yes/No MEENU 2025.01.08 10:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document