Priyanka And ANR v. State Of Haryana And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRWP NO. 9039 OF 2020 DATE OF DECISION : 03.11.2020 Priyanka and another

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana and others

...Respondents

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA Present :

Mr. Pardeep Panwar, Advocate, for the petitioners.

Mr. Bhupender Singh, DAG, Haryana.

(Presence marked through video conference).

ARUN MONGA, J. (ORAL) The petitioners have approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking issuance of writ in the nature of mandamus, directing the official respondents to protect the life and liberty of petitioners and not to allow private respondents No.4 and 7 to interfere in their peaceful life.

2.

The petition is conspicuously silent about petitioner No.2 who is stated to be 37 years old man, as to whether he has been earlier married and, if married, whether he obtained any divorce in order to have a live in relationship with petitioner No.1.

3.

On a query of the Court, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that, per his instructions, petitioner No.2 is a married man and he has not obtained divorce from his wife.

4.

In the premise, this Court was inclined to dismiss the petition with costs on the ground of concealment alone, however, learned counsel for VIVEK PAHWA 2020.11.03 11:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

the petitioners pleads that said fact has been inadvertently omitted by him and petitioner No.2 is not at fault. He submits that imposition of costs would reflect on his professional conduct and therefore, no costs be imposed. 5.

Dismissed. No costs.

NOVEMBER 03, 2020 (ARUN MONGA) shalini JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No VIVEK PAHWA 2020.11.03 11:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document