Khushi And ANR v. State Of Haryana And ORS
Date of Decision : August 20, 2024 KHUSHI AND ANR -PETITIONERS V/S STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS -RESPONDENTS
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP TIWARI
Present:
Mr. Rampal Kaushik, Advocate for Mr. Karan Singh, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr. Bhupender Singh, D.A.G., Haryana.
Mr. Manish Bansal, P.P., U.T. Chandigarh with Mr. Rajiv Vij, Addl. P.P., U.T. Chandigarh.
*** KULDEEP TIWARI, J. (ORAL) 1.
Through the instant petition, as filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners seek issuance of directions upon the official respondents, to ensure protection of their lives and liberty at the hands of private respondents.
2.
On 22.04.2024, this Court had passed the hereinafter extracted order upon the instant petition:- "Both the petitioners, who are major, seek protection to their life and liberty, as they have decided to live together. On 8.4.2024, the following order was passed by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court:- "The petitioners have approached this Court claiming themselves to be in a live-in relationship.
It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner No.2 is a married man but he is in a matrimonial discord for which he has also filed a divorce petition on 05.09.2022. It has further submitted that petitioner No.2 has no child from his earlier marriage and both petitioners are in a live-in relationship.
It is very strange that the allegations made in the present petition by petitioner No.1 are that the private respondents are trying to marry her with some old aged person and admittedly, in the present scenario petitioner No.2 is 16 years elder to petitioner No.1 which raises eyebrows. Serious allegations against the parents of petitioner No.1 have been levelled that they would sell petitioner No.1 for money.
Notice of motion.
Mr. Tanuj Sharma, AAG, Haryana, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of respondents No.1 to 3.
Dasti notices be issued to respondent No.4 for 22.04.2024.
In addition to above, respondent No.3 is also directed to inform respondent No.4 to be present in the Court on the next date of hearing.
The petitioners are also directed to be present in the Court on the next date of hearing.
In the meanwhile, respondent No.2-The Superintendent of Police, Jind is directed to look into the matter and take appropriate action in accordance with law."
Mr. Sunil Goswami, Advocate has caused appearance on behalf of respondent No.4. The petitioners have also caused appearance in person in pursuance of the directions (supra). Though the notice was only served to respondent No.4, however, it is informed by the learned counsel for the petitioners that a number of persons of their family members are also present in the Court premises as well as outside the vicinity of this Court and are causing imminent threat to the life and liberty of the petitioners. On the oral request of the learned counsel for the petitioners,
the State of UT, Chandigarh is impleaded as respondent No.11 in the array of the respondents.
Mr. Manish Bansal, PP for UT, Chandigarh, waives service on behalf of the respondent-State of UT, Chandigarh. Mr. Yuvraj Shandilya, AAG, Haryana, seeks time to file reply to the instant petition.
The asked for request is allowed and three weeks time is granted to the respondent-State to file reply to the instant petition. However, considering the imminent threat as posed by the family members of the petitioners, who are present in the Court premises, this Court deems it fit and appropriate to direct the SHO, Police Station Sector-3, Chandigarh, to ensure the safe transit of the petitioners to their respective places.
In the meanwhile, the Superintendent of Police, Jind, is directed to ensure that no harm shall be caused to the petitioners during the pendency of the instant petition.
Adjourned to 20.8.2024.
Let a copy of this order be given to the learned PP for the UT, Chandigarh for its compliance under the signatures of Special Secretary of this Court."
3.
In deference to the hereinabove extracted order, the respondentState of Haryana has placed on record a reply, on affidavit of Joginder Singh, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Jind- Headquarter, District Jind. This reply makes revelations that an inquiry was conducted by the police and the upshot of the said inquiry is that, as of today, there is no threat to the lives and liberty of the petitioners.
4.
In view of the above, no further order is required to be passed upon the instant petition at this stage. Therefore, the instant petition is closed. However, liberty is reserved to the petitioners to, in case, they apprehend any danger to their lives and liberty in future, approach the appropriate authority concerned for redressal of their grievance, whereupon,
the authority concerned shall evaluate the alleged threat perception and take appropriate action as per law.
5.
Disposed of accordingly.
(KULDEEP TIWARI) August 20, 2024 JUDGE devinder Whether speaking/reasoned :
Yes/No Whether Reportable :
Yes/No