Varsha And Another v. State Of Haryana And Others

-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH (135) Date of Decision:-15.02.2024 Varsha and another ......Petitioners

Versus

State of Haryana and others ......Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK JAIN ****

Present:

Mr. Amarjeet S. Prajapati, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Tanuj Sharma, AAG, Punjab.

**** ALOK JAIN, J. (Oral) 1.

The present petition has been filed under Article(s) 226/227 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the official respondents to protect the life and liberty of the petitioners, who got married on 12.02.2024, at the hands of private respondents.

2.

Notice of motion to the official respondents. 3.

Mr. Tanuj Sharma, AAG, Haryana, accepts notice on behalf of the official respondents.

4.

Considering the nature of the order being passed, there is no necessity to serve the private respondent(s) or to seek a reply from any one of the respondents.

5.

The petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2

-2to take into consideration the request of the petitioners made vide representation dated 12.02.2024 (Annexure P-5) and take appropriate action, in accordance with law.

6.

This petition is being considered only for the purpose of protection of life and liberty of the petitioners and the filing, pendency or the orders passed by this Court in this petition shall neither be construed as any stamp of the Court qua the relationship/marriage of the petitioners nor shall be relied upon by any authority in any proceedings initiated against them under any other provision of law.

7.

This order shall not operate as an alibi or defence to any proceedings which might be pending or may arise against the petitioners. Although, the State is duty bound to protect its citizens and only with the said motive, the present order/directions have been passed. 8.

It is made clear that the filing of this petition and any order passed herein does not approve or disapprove the relationship of the petitioners and is not a stamp by the Court qua their relationship, as this petition is considered only for the purpose of ensuring the protection of life and liberty of the petitioners being citizens of this Country and for no other reason.

9.

It is further made clear to the petitioners that, in case, any averment made in this petition or in the representation dated 12.02.2024 (Annexure P-5) is found to be incorrect, the State authorities are directed to take appropriate action, in accordance with law. 10.

However, since this petition is being disposed of in limine, therefore, a copy of the complete paper book be sent through registered post

-3to respondent Nos.4 and 5 being parents of petitioner No.1 as there is serious doubt with regard to them being even aware about the act and conduct of their daughter.

(ALOK JAIN) JUDGE February 15, 2024.

Sandeep Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No Whether Reportable:- Yes/No