Rajni And Another v. State Of Punjab And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRWP No.6067 of 2024 Date of Decision: 28.06.2024 Rajni and another .....Petitioners.

Versus

State of Punjab and others .....Respondents.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA ***** Present:- Mr. L.S. Mann, Advocate appearing as proxy counsel for Mr. Sandeep Sharma, Advocate for the petitioners.

MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA, J. (Oral) Both the petitioners have joined hands to prefer this petition for seeking the issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing respondents No.2 and 3 to protect their lives and liberty as they apprehend threat to the same at the hands of respondents No.4 to 6 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-5) has already been moved to respondent No.2 in this regard. 2.

Notice of motion to respondents No.1 to 3 only. 3.

Mr. Siddharth Sandhu, learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab, has appeared on behalf of respondents No.1 to 3 in this case in pursuance of the copies of the present petition having been sent to the YAG DUTT 2024.06.28 17:31 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

CRWP No.6067 of 2024 -2respondent-State in advance and he accepts the notice on behalf of these respondents.

4.

Heard.

5.

Learned proxy counsel for the petitioners restricts his prayer to the issuance of direction to respondent No.2 to look into and take appropriate action on the above-said representation, i.e Annexure P-5, only to the extent of the prayer, as made by the petitioners therein, for the protection of their lives and liberty.

6.

Learned State counsel has no objection for the same. 7.

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 afore-discussed limited prayer as made by learned proxy counsel for the petitioners and without commenting or expressing any opinion on the legality and validity of the marriage as stated to have been solemnized between the petitioners, respondent No.2-Senior Superintendent of Police, Jalandhar (Rural), is hereby directed to look into the above-referred representation (Annexure P-5) of the petitioners so far as it pertains to their prayer qua the protection of their lives and liberty only and if it is found that the petitioners genuinely deserve such protection, then, to take appropriate action in accordance with law.

8.

The petition in hand stands disposed of accordingly. (MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA) June 28, 2024 JUDGE Yag Dutt Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes Whether Reportable:

No YAG DUTT 2024.06.28 17:31 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment