High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRWP/5869/2021disposed of

Sunil Chauhan And ANR v. State Of Haryana And Others

2021-06-29Mrs. Justice Meenakshi I. Mehta2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Sr.No.110 CRWP No.5869 of 2021 Date of Decision: 29.06.2021 Sunil Chauhan and another

...Petitioners

Versus

The State of Haryana and others

...Respondents

(Heard through Video-Conferencing) CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA

Present:

Mr. Amritpal Singh Sohal, Advocate, for the petitioners.

* * * * MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA, J.

(ORAL) By way of this petition, both the petitioners seek the indulgence of this Court for the issuance of a direction to respondents No.1 to 5 to protect their life and liberty as they apprehend threat to the same at the hands of respondents No.6 and 7 because they (petitioners) have solemnized their marriage against the wishes of these respondents. It has also been mentioned in this petition that a representation (Annexure P-4) has already been moved to respondent No.2 in this regard.

Notice of motion to respondents No.1 to 5 only. Mr. Apoorv Garg, learned Deputy Advocate General, Haryana, has joined the proceedings on behalf of respondents No.1 to 3 and Ms. Samina Dhir, learned Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, has NEETU RANI 2021.06.29 17:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC

CRWP No.5869 of 2021 -2- ......

joined the proceedings on behalf of respondents No.4 and 5 in this case, in pursuance of the copies of this petition having been sent to both the respondent-States in advance and they accept the notice on behalf of these respondents respectively.

Heard.

Learned counsel for the petitioners restricts his prayer to the issuance of a direction to respondent No.2 only to take appropriate action on the said representation of the petitioners, i.e. Annexure P-4. Learned counsel for both the States have no objection for the same.

Accordingly, keeping in view the above-discussed limited prayer as made by learned counsel for the petitioners and without expressing any opinion on the legality and validity of the marriage, as stated to have been solemnized between the petitioners, respondent No.2-Commissioner (wrongly mentioned as 'Commissionerate') of Police, Panchkula, is hereby directed to look into the said representation of the petitioners (Annexure P-4) and if it is found that the petitioners genuinely deserve any protection, then to take appropriate action in accordance with law.

This petition stands disposed of accordingly. (MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA) 29.06.2021 JUDGE neetu Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No NEETU RANI 2021.06.29 17:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC