High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/43605/2015dismissed

Jamna & ANR. v. State Of Punjab & ORS.

2015-12-23Mr. Justice Inderjit Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No. M-43605 of 2015 Date of decision: 23.12.2015 Jamna and another ..Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab and others ..Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY

1. Whether reporters of local newspapers may be allowed to see judgment? Yes/No

2. To be referred to reporters or not? Yes/No

3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Yes/No

Present:

Mr. Daman Jeet Bhoriwal, Advocate for the petitioners.

Daya Chaudhary, J. (Oral) This petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for issuance of direction to official respondents to protect the life and liberty of the petitioners at the hands of respondent No.4 and to provide adequate Police help to the petitioners. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that as per case of the petitioners, petitioner No.1 was married to respondent No.4 in the year 1995 and out of said wedlock, three daughters and one son were born. The petitioners are being harassed by respondent No.4. Learned counsel also submits that petitioner No.1 was given beatings by respondent No.4 and she was kept in illegal detention. Thereafter, petitioner No.1 has started to reside with petitioner No.2. NEETU RANI 2015.12.26 15:48 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Criminal Misc. No. M-43605 of 2015 Heard arguments of learned counsel for the petitioner and have also perused the documents available on the file. Learned counsel for the petitioners is not able to show any relationship of the petitioner No.1 with petitioner No.2 as it has simply been stated by him that petitioner No.1 was given beatings by respondent No.4 and thereafter, she started to reside with petitioner No.2. Four children have born out of earlier marriage of petitioner No.1 with respondent No.4 but they are not residing together. Nothing has been shown to the Court as to when petitioner No.1 was given beatings by respondent No.4.

Simply by stating that both the petitioners are residing together and the same is not liked by respondent No.4, no direction can be issued as the Court cannot be a party to the relationship of the petitioners.

Dismissed.

23.12.2015 (DAYA CHAUDHARY) neetu JUDGE NEETU RANI 2015.12.26 15:48 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh