High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRWP/6263/2021disposed of

Simran Sharma And Another v. State Of Haryana And Others

2021-07-08Mr. Justice Jasgurpreet Singh Puri3 pages

THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH.

CRWP-6263-2021 (O&M).

Decided on: July 8, 2021.

Simran Sharma and another .. Petitioners

VERSUS

The State of Haryana and others .. Respondents * * *

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASGURPREET SINGH PURI * * * PRESENT Mr.Naresh Kumar, Advocate, for the petitioners.

JASGURPREET SINGH PURI , J. (ORAL ) The present petition has been filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, with the prayer to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing respondent No.2 and 3 to protect the life and liberty of the petitioners and to restrain private respondents No.4 to 8 from harassing and interfering in the peaceful life of the petitioners. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that petitioner No.1 (girl) was earlier married with respondent No.4 and the marriage is still subsisting but respondent No.4 had been harassing and

taunting petitioner No.1 on one pretext or the other and he was a habitual drug and alcohol addict. He has further submitted that as per the averments made in para No.4 of the present petition the situation had become so unbearable that petitioner No.1 left the house of respondent No.4 on 02.07.2021 and reached at her parental home but even they also did not allow petitioner No.1 to enter into the house and therefore, in the facts and circumstances, petitioner No.2 and his family members accepted petitioner No.1 and now the petitioner No.1 is living with the petitioner No.2. However, there is active threat from the private respondents to both the petitioners. He has submitted that it was only because of adverse circumstances which were caused by the respondent No.4 that petitioner No.

1 had to leave his house to save her life and in order to get a shelter she had started living with petitioner No.2. He has submitted that since there is a threat to life of the petitioners, they may be granted protection of life. He has submitted that a representation dated 3.7.2021 (Annexure P-3) was also made to the Superintendent of Police, Sirsa, but no action was taken on the same. The receipt of sending representation Annexure P-3 by way of courier has also been attached with the present case. Notice of motion to respondent Nos.1 to 3 only. Mr.Naveen Singh Panwar, DAG, Haryana, accepts notice on behalf of aforesaid respondents and states that he has no objection in case the representation of the petitioners is directed to be taken into consideration and further action is taken in accordance with law.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.

The scope of the present petition is confined only for the protection of life of the petitioners. It does not in any way reflect anything on the inter-se relationship between the petitioners or the relationship between the petitioner No.1 and respondent No.4 but the scope is confined only to the right to life guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

In view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case, this petition is disposed of with direction to respondent No.2 to consider representation dated 3.7.2021 (Annexure P-3) filed by the petitioners and to take the necessary action, if so required, for ensuring the protection of life of the petitioners in accordance with law. July 8, 2021.

(JASGURPREET SINGH PURI) raj arora JUDGE Whether speaking / reasoned Yes / No Whether reportable Yes / No