Hem Lata And Another v. State Of Haryana And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRWP No.6099 of 2024 Date of Decision: 28.06.2024 Hem Lata and another

...Petitioners

Versus

State of Haryana and others

...Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA Present:- Mr. Arun K. Gupta, Advocate for the petitioners.

***** MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA, J. (Oral) By way of the instant petition, both the petitioners have sought the indulgence of this Court for 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 and 5 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 respondents No.2 and 3 in this regard.

2.

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

Mr. Apoorv Garg, learned Senior Deputy Advocate General, Haryana, 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 respondent-State in advance and he accepts the notice on their behalf. NEETU RANI 2024.06.28 17:04 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment PHHC, CHD

CRWP No.6099 of 2024 -24.

Heard.

5.

Learned counsel for the petitioners 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 petitioners, i.e. Annexure P-5. 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 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-Superintendent of Police, Ambala, is, hereby, directed to look into the above-referred representation (Annexure P-5) of the petitioners and if it is found that the petitioners genuinely deserve any protection, then to take appropriate action in accordance with law. 8.

This petition stands disposed of accordingly. 28.06.2024 (MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA) neetu JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes Whether Reportable:

No NEETU RANI 2024.06.28 17:04 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment PHHC, CHD