Rajji Begam And ANR v. State Of Punjab And ORS

CRWP-1399-2025 (O&M) -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRWP-1399-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision: February 11, 2025 Rajji Begam and another ......Petitioners

Versus

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

Present:

Mr.Kapil Khanna, Advocate and Mr.Anil Kumar Saini, Advocates for the petitioners.

Mr.Munish Raj Choudhary, Advocate for respondent No.4.

........

RAJESH BHARDWAJ, J.(ORAL) CRM-W-184-2025 Application is allowed, as prayed for.

CRWP-1399-2025 1.

Present petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of direction to respondents No.2 and 3 to protect the life and liberty of the petitioners, who are residing in live-inrelationship, from the hands of private respondents No.4 to 11. 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioners states that both the petitioners are major and are living together in live-in-relationship against the wishes of respondents No.4 to 11 and have sought protection to their life and liberty. They apprehend danger from respondents No.4 to 11. They have submitted a representation, dated 07.02.2025 (Annexure P-3) to respondent No.2.

MEENU 2025.02.11 14:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRWP-1399-2025 (O&M) -23.

Notice of motion to respondents no.1 to 3-State only. 4.

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-Senior Superintendent of Police, District Patiala, Punjab, to decide the representation (Annexure P-3) 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. February 11, 2025 ( RAJESH BHARDWAJ ) meenuss JUDGE 1.

Whether speaking/reasoned ?

Yes/No 2.

Whether reportable ?

Yes/No MEENU 2025.02.11 14:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document