Kusum And ANR v. State Of Haryana And ORS
....1....
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH Sr.No.117 Date of Decision: 04th August, 2022.
Kusum & Another
...Petitioners
Versus
State of Haryana & Others
...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA
Present:
Mr. Sankalp, Advocate, for the petitioners.
* * * * MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA, J.
(ORAL) By way of the instant petition, both the petitioners seek the indulgence of this Court for the issuance of a direction to respondents No.1 to 4 to protect their lives and liberty as they apprehend threat to the same at the hands of respondents No.5 to 7 because they (petitioners) are living in relationship. It has also been mentioned in this petition that the representations Annexures P-1 to P-3 have already been moved to respondents No.4, 2 and 3 respectively, in this regard. Mr. Apoorv Garg, learned Deputy Advocate General, Haryana, has appeared on behalf of respondents No.1 to 4 in this case in pursuance of the copies of the present petition having been sent to the respondent-State in advance.
At this stage, Mr. Vikram Jeet Singh, Advocate, has also put in appearance on behalf of respondents No.6 & 7 in this petition and has submitted his Power of Attorney in the Court and the same is taken on the
....2....
record. He apprises the Court that a criminal case under Section 346 IPC has already been registered at Police Station Alewa District Jind, vide the FIR bearing No.0167 dated 30.07.2022, at the instance of respondent No.7Anoop regarding petitioner No.1 having gone missing from her house. Heard.
Learned counsel for the petitioners restricts his prayer to the issuance of a direction to respondent No.2 only to look into and take appropriate action on the said representation of petitioner No.1, i.e. Annexure P-2.
Learned State counsel as well as learned counsel for respondents No.6 & 7 have 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 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 relationship between the petitioners, respondent No.2-Superintendent of Police, Sonipat, is hereby directed to look into the said representation (Annexure P-2) of petitioner No.1 only to the extent of the threat perception of the petitioners qua their lives and if they are found to be genuinely deserving the protection of their lives, then to take appropriate action in accordance with law.
It is further clarified that this order shall not amount to be a hindrance/obstruction to/in the investigation of the afore-said criminal case arising out of the said FIR and shall also not be construed to be a shield to the
....3....
petitioners against any other action/proceedings already initiated or intended/contemplated to be initiated against them by any competent authority/person on account of their said relationship and permissible under the relevant provisions of law.
This petition stands disposed of accordingly. (MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA) JUDGE 04.08.2022.
seema Whether speaking/reasoned?
Yes Whether Reportable?
No