Rohit Kumar And ANR v. State Of Haryana And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRWP-480-2025 DECIDED ON: 17.01.2025 ROHIT KUMAR AND ANR .....PETITIONERS

VERSUS

STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS .....RESPONDENTS

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH.

Present:

Mr. L.M. Brara, Advocate, for the petitioners.

SANJAY VASHISTH, J (ORAL) 1.

Present petition has been filed by the petitioners for directing respondent Nos.2 and 3 to protect the life and liberty of them from the hands of private respondents.

2.

This Court has noticed that petitioner No.2 namely Paramjit Kaur, is already married to respondent No.4 - Kuldip Singh, and three children are born out of the said wedlock. Sharing no responsibility for looking after of their minor children, petitioner No.2 has eloped with petitioner No.1 - Rohit Kumar.

3.

In the present petition, first time, the allegations have been levelled against respondent No.4 - Kuldip Singh that he is habitual drunker and playing gambling. However, counsel for the petitioners could not refer any document appended with the petition, that any complaint was ever made by petitioner No.2 in regard to the maltreatment at the hands of respondent LAVISHA 2025.01.17 18:51 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh

CRWP-480-2025 -2No.4, to any authority, or any litigation has been started, as provided under different statutes.

4.

While dealing with such petitions, the Courts have to be more conscious about the social set-up of the country. If the practice which is there in the present petition, is accepted, and the orders of protection are allowed to be passed in the casual manner, as have been passed in normal course, undoubtedly, it may effect the lives of many people who are the members of the same family.

5.

Even, no particular instance has been highlighted or referred by counsel for the petitioner anywhere in the petition or in the representation showing that the petitioners are feeling apprehensive of the life and liberty, at the instance of the private respondents, at any particular moment. 6.

Therefore, such a prayer cannot be entertained with the aid of exercising power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 7.

Accordingly, for the reasons recorded here above, present petition stands dismissed, same being without merits. (SANJAY VASHISTH) 17.01.2025 JUDGE Lavisha Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No LAVISHA 2025.01.17 18:51 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh