Sonia And ANR v. State Of Punjab And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRWP No. 7921 of 2020 (O&M) DATE OF DECISION : 05.10.2020 Sonia and another

...Petitioners

Versus

State of Punjab and others

...Respondents

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA Present :

Mr. K. S. Maangat, Advocate, for the petitioners.

Mr. Sidakmeet Sandhu, AAG, Punjab.

(Presence marked through video conference) ARUN MONGA, J. (ORAL) Petitioners, claiming to be in a live-in relationship, have approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of directions to the official respondents No.2 and 3 to take action on their representation dated 26.09.2020 (Annexure P-3) for protection of their life and liberty, as they apprehend risk to their life from private respondents No.4 to 9.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that marriage of petitioner No.1 was performed with respondent No.6 on 29.05.2019. Respondent No.6 was through out humiliating and harassing petitioner No.1, due to which she left the matrimonial house. Now both the petitioners, out of their free will, are in a live-in relationship. The private respondents are threatening to kill them or involve them in some false criminal case. 3.

He further submits that petitioners also submitted representation dated 26.09.2020 (Annexure P-3) to respondent No.2 i.e. Senior Superintendent of Police, Kapurthala but the same has not been adverted till date. Hence, the petition.

PRADEEP NAUTIYAL 2020.10.14 23:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

4.

Heard.

5.

The petition appears to have been filed to seek indulgence of this court, to later use the same as a shield against the conceded violation of law committed by petitioner No.1, who has not taken divorce from her husband. There seems no threat, otherwise, to the life of the petitioners. 6.

Taking into consideration the averments contained in the petition, it is not a case warranting interference by this Court under its extra ordinary constitutional jurisdiction.

7.

Dismissed.

(ARUN MONGA) OCTOBER 05, 2020 JUDGE vandana Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No PRADEEP NAUTIYAL 2020.10.14 23:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document