Bhawna Rani And ANR v. State Of Punjab And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 15.03.2023 Bhawna Rani and another

...Petitioners

Versus

State of Punjab and others

...Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH

Present:

Mr. Deepak Kumar Bartia, Advocate for the petitioners.

SANJAY VASHISTH, J.

By way of filing this petition, the petitioners seek necessary protection of their lives and personal liberty in view of the fact that they are in a live-in relationship and are under eminent threats at the hands of respondents No. 4 to 6.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are in a live-in relationship against the wishes of respondents No. 4 to 6 and have sought protection to their lives and liberty. It is submitted that petitioner No. 1-Bhawna Rani, aged about 18 years 03 months and petitioner No. 2 - Deepak, aged about 18 years 07 months, have not performed marriage because petitioner No. 2 has not attained the marriageable age, but they apprehend danger at the hands of private respondents No. 4 to 6, who will eliminate them.

In the context of threat perception at the hands of private respondents No. 4 to 6 petitioners have allegedly moved a representation dated 10.03.2023, (Annexure P-3) to Senior Superintendent of Police, Mansa, Punjab (respondent No. 2), wherein, all the apprehension to their lives have been expressed.

Notice of motion.

On asking of the Court, Mr. Anmol Singh Sandhu, AAG, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 to 3 (State). At this stage, Mr. Pardhuman Garg, Advocate appears and files his memorandum of appearance on behalf of respondent No. 4. Same is taken on record. Registry is directed to tag the same at appropriate place. He requests to allow him to meet his daughter once. Since petitioners have not contracted any marriage and seek only protection qua their lives and personal liberty, and for the same already representation dated 10.03.2023, (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.

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 innocence of the petitioners is established, respondent No. 2 shall proceed to take appropriate action in order to protect their lives and personal liberty from being invaded by private respondents No. 4 to 6. This order is passed at this stage without meaning anything on the status of the petitioners on the basis of live-in relationship. Respondent No. 2 would pass necessary order without being influenced by any statement of fact recorded here-in-above.

However, it is directed that if respondent No. 4 is made any

such request as recorded here-above to respondent No. 2 and same is found genuine, he may considered to allow such meeting. Petition stands disposed of accordingly.

(SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE March 15, 2023 Riya Whether Speaking/Reasoned:

YES/NO Whether Reportable:

YES/NO