High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRWP/9025/2020disposed of

Sumit And ANR v. State Of Haryana And ORS

2020-11-03Mr. Justice Harsimran Singh Sethi3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH.

(112) Date of Decision: November 03, 2020 Sumit and another .. Petitioners

Versus

State of Haryana and others .. Respondents (Through video conferencing) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI

Present:

Mr. Vaibhav Narang, Advocate, for the petitioners.

Ms. Rajni Gupta, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. *** HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI, J.(ORAL) As per the averments made in the present petition, though, both the petitioners have attained the age of majority but petitioner No.1 is yet to attain the marriageable age.

Learned counsel for the petitioners argues that the parents of the petitioner No.2 wanted to get her married against her wishes and therefore, she has left her home and is now living alongwith the family of petitioner No.1 at their house for the last about two weeks. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that no objection has been raised by the family of petitioner No.1 in case the petitioner No.2 lives alongwith them as they also intend that after petitioner No.1 attained the age of marriage, both the petitioners can decide their future in respect of marrying each other at that relevant point of time.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that as petitioner No.2 is living with family of petitioner No.1, the petitioners are apprehending threat to their life and liberty at the hands of respondent No.4mother of petitioner No.2. The prayer of the petitioners is for ensuring the life and liberty of the petitioners as both the petitioners are major in age and can take decision with respect to their life and furture. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have already given a representation to the Commissioner of Police, Panchkula on 23.10.2020 (Annexure P-3) and the petitioners will be satisfied, at this stage, in case a time bound direction is issued to respondent No.2 to decide the same by passing an appropriate speaking order. Notice of motion.

Ms. Rajni Gupta, learned Additional Advocate General, Haryana, who has joined the proceedings through video conference, keeping in view the service of advance copy of petition, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents-State and raises no objection for deciding the representation of the petitioner in a time bound manner.

Without commenting upon the merits of the case or about the entitlement of the petitioners for the relief which has been claimed by them in the representation dated 23.10.2020 (Annexure P-3), the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2 to decide the representation dated 23.10.2020 (Annexure P-3) within a period of four weeks from the receipt of copy of this order. In case any merit is found in the representation, the appropriate action will be taken by respondent No.2

to ensure that no harm is caused to the life and liberty of the petitioners at the hands of the private respondent.

(HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI) November 03, 2020 JUDGE harsha/naresh.k Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No