High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRWP/7802/2021disposed of

Gagandeep Kaur v. State Of Punjab And Others

2021-08-18Mrs. Justice Meenakshi I. Mehta2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Sr.No.110 CRWP No.7802 of 2021 Date of Decision: 18.08.2021 Gagandeep Kaur

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab and others

...Respondents

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

Present:

Mr. Rajesh Nain, Advocate, for the petitioner.

* * * * MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA, J.

By way of this petition, the petitioner seeks the indulgence of this Court for the issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing respondents No.2 to 4 to protect her life and liberty as she apprehends threat to the same at the hands of respondents No.5 to 9, while averring that respondent No.5 is her husband and he as well as his family members used to give her beatings on account of her refusal to get the land, as inherited by her from her parents, transferred in their favour and due to this reason, she was constrained to leave her matrimonial home. It has also been mentioned in this petition that a representation (Annexure P-2) has already been moved to respondent No.2 in this regard.

Ms. Samina Dhir, learned Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, has joined the proceedings on behalf of respondents No.1 to 4 in this case, in pursuance of the copies of this petition having been sent to the respondent-State in advance.

NEETU RANI 2021.08.19 15:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC

CRWP No.7802 of 2021 -2- ......

Heard.

Learned counsel for the petitioner restricts his prayer to the issuance of a direction to respondent No.2 to look into and take appropriate action on the said representation of the petitioner, i.e. Annexure P-2. Learned State counsel has no objection for the same. Keeping in view the intent of the fundamental right as enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution of India which ensures the protection of life and liberty to the citizens as well as the above-discussed limited prayer as made by learned counsel for the petitioner and without commenting or expressing any opinion on the merits of the matter in hand, respondent No.2-Senior Superintendent of Police, Patiala, is hereby directed to look into the afore-said representation of the petitioner, i.e.

Annexure P-2 and if it is found that the petitioner genuinely deserves any protection, then to take appropriate action in accordance with law. It is further clarified that this order shall not be construed to be a shield to the petitioner against any action already initiated or intended/contemplated to be initiated by the competent authority/person against her on account of the afore-said facts and circumstances of the present matter and permissible under any relevant provisions of law. This petition stands disposed of accordingly. (MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA) 18.08.2021 JUDGE neetu Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether Reportable No NEETU RANI 2021.08.