Kajal And ANR v. State Of Punjab And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRWP-995-2025 Decided on : 30.01.2025 KAJAL AND ANR . . . Petitioners

Versus

STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS . . . Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH PRESENT: Mr. Manpreet, Advocate for Mr. Sahil Kumar, Advocate for the petitioners. **** SANJAY VASHISTH , J. (Oral) 1.

By way of filing this petition, petitioners seek necessary protection of their lives and personal liberty in view of the fact that they have not solemnized their marriage so far and are living in a live-in relationship and are under eminent threat at the hands of respondents No.5 to 10. 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are in a live-in relationship against the wishes of respondents No. 5 to 10, and have sought protection to their life and liberty. It is submitted that petitioner No. 1 - Kajal, is aged more than 20 years and petitioner No. 2 - Amit Kumar, is aged more than 20 years, they apprehend danger at the hands of private respondents No. 5 to 10, who will eliminate them if they intend to solemnize the marriage at relevant time.

3.

In the context of threat perception at the hands of private respondents No. 4 to 10, petitioners have allegedly moved representation dated 24.01.2025 (Annexure P-3), to the Inspector General, Patiala (respondent No.2), wherein, all the apprehensions qua their lives and liberty has been expressed.

4.

Notice of motion to respondents No.1 to 4 only. SANGEETA 2025.02.03 13:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRWP-995-2025 - 2 - 5.

On advance notice, Mr. Amandeep Singh, DAG, Punjab, puts in appearance on behalf of respondents No.1 to 4 (State). 6.

Since, petitioners have not contracted any marriage and seek only protection qua their lives and personal liberty, and for the same already representation dated 24.01.2025 (Annexure P-3) is pending, it would be appropriate to direct respondent No. 2 to have a fair look to the said representation, on the grievance of the petitioners in order to ascertain veracity of allegations made by them.

7.

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. If the innocence of the petitioners is established, then respondent No.2 shall proceed to take appropriate action in order to protect lives and personal liberty of the petitioners from being invaded by private respondents No.5 to 10.

8.

The aforesaid order is being passed at this stage without meaning anything on the status of the parties on the basis of live-in relationship and age of petitioners. Respondent No.2 would consider and pass necessary order without being influenced by any statement of fact recorded herein-above.

Petition stands disposed of accordingly.

(SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE January 30, 2025 sangeeta Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No SANGEETA 2025.02.03 13:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document