Rajwinder Kaur And Another v. State Of Punjab And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRWP No.804 of 2020 Date of Decision: 24.01.2020 RAJWINDER KAUR AND ANOTHER ......Petitioners Vs STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJ MOHAN SINGH Present:Petitioners in-person along with Mr. Joginder Pal Devgan, Advocate.

**** RAJ MOHAN SINGH, J.(Oral) In this petition, petitioners have approached this Court with the allegations that they are already married having children from their previous marriages. No divorce has been taken by either of the petitioners from their earlier spouse. They are in live in relationship. They have prayed for issuance of necessary directions to the official respondents to protect their lives and personal liberties from being invaded by the private respondents. They prayed for protection.

In the context of threat perception at the hands of private respondents, petitioners have prayed for necessary directions for safeguarding their personal civil and legal rights.

Notice of motion to respondents No.1 to 3.

On the asking of the Court, Mr. J.S. Ghuman, D.A.G., Punjab accepts notice on behalf of State-respondents No.1 to 3. Keeping in view the alleged relationship between the petitioners, this Court is not in a position to opine any validity of this relationship or otherwise but so far as threat perception in respect of their lives and personal liberties is concerned, respondent No.2 can be asked to have a fair look on the grievance of the petitioners in order to ascertain veracity of allegations made by the petitioners.

Respondent No.2 would be at liberty to devise his/her own mechanism to ascertain the truth. He/she would also be at liberty to join the petitioners or any other person acquainted with facts in issue. In case respondent No.2 finds that there is some truth in the allegations of the petitioners, then he/she shall proceed to take appropriate action in accordance with law. The aforesaid order is being passed at this stage without meaning anything on the merits of the case. Respondent No.2 would pass necessary order without being influenced by any observation made by the Court in terms of pleadings at this stage. This order shall not debar the official respondents from proceeding against any of the party in accordance with law in case they are involved in some other

case. It would be appreciated if the representation filed by the petitioners is decided within a period of one month from today keeping in view the threat perception shown by the petitioners. Petition stands disposed of accordingly.

January 24, 2020 (RAJ MOHAN SINGH) geeta JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No