High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRWP/9140/2021disposed of

Najruna And Another v. State Of Haryana And Others

2021-09-23Mr. Justice Raj Mohan Singh3 pages

-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH (Through video-conferencing) CRWP No.9140 of 2021 Date of Decision: 23.09.2021 NAJRUNA AND ANOTHER -Petitioners

Versus

STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS -Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJ MOHAN SINGH

Present:

Mr. Vishal Garg Narwana, Advocate for the petitioners.

**** RAJ MOHAN SINGH, J. (Oral) Petitioners have preferred this petition for issuance of necessary directions to the official respondents No.2 and 3 for protecting their lives and personal liberties from being invaded by the private respondents No.4 to 6 on the ground that they are living in live-in relationship and are major. Earlier petition bearing CRM-M No.8822 of 2021 filed by the petitioners was ordered to be withdrawn with a liberty to the petitioners to file a fresh petition with clear averments as to whether petitioner No.1 is still married or has already taken divorce from her husband before entering into live-in relationship with petitioner No.2.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the

-2petitioners have made necessary pleadings in the para no.4 of the petition.

Petitioners feel reasonable apprehension and threat perception at the hands of the private respondents and pray that their personal/civil rights be not violated by them. Precisely, in the context of aforesaid relief, petitioners have approached the Superintendent of Police, Mewat (Nuh)/respondent No.2 by way of representation dated 17.09.2021 (through courier).

Notice of motion to respondents No.1 to 3.

On the asking of the Court, Mr. Anant Kataria, D.A.G., Haryana accepts notice on behalf of State-respondents No.1 to 3.

At this stage, without meaning anything on the merits of the case and without commenting upon relationship or otherwise of the petitioners, respondent No.2 is directed to look into the grievance of the petitioners for which a representation has already been filed by the petitioners on 17.09.2021. Respondent No.2 is directed to assess the threat perception of the petitioners. It is made clear that this Court has not commented upon validity of relationship or otherwise of the petitioners in any manner. Respondent No.2 would be fully empowered to look into the threat perception of the petitioners

-3by devising his/her own mechanism and pass appropriate order on the representation dated 17.09.2021 preferably within a period of one month from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

Petition stands disposed of accordingly.

September 23, 2021 (RAJ MOHAN SINGH) Atik JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No