Sunita Rani v. State Of Punjab And Others
In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, at Chandigarh Date of Decision: 16.06.2025 Sunita Rani ... Petitioner(s)
Versus
The State of Punjab and Others ... Respondent(s) CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Anil Kshetarpal.
Present:
Mr. G.S.Brar, Advocate for the petitioner(s).
Mr. Salil Sabhlok, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, for respondents No.1 to 3.
Anil Kshetarpal, J.
1.
The petitioner prays for issuance of a writ in the nature of habeas corpus to recover the alleged detenue, namely Roma Walia who is the petitioner's daughter.
2.
The learned State counsel has informed the Court that Roma Walia married respondent No.4-Pawan Kalsi on 09.06.2025 and then they filed a writ petition for the grant of protection to their life and liberty vide Criminal Writ Petition No. 6250 of 2025, which was disposed of on 12.06.2025 with the following order:- "1.
The petitioners are seeking a direction to the official respondents No. 2 and 3 to protect their life and liberty as they apprehend danger from private respondents No. 4 to 6. It is stated in the petition that petitioners have performed their
marriage, which is against the will of private respondents No. 4 to 6 and they have apprehension that the private respondents might cause physical harm to them.
2.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that both the petitioners being major, got married against the wishes of private respondents No. 4 to 6. Ever since then, the petitioners are being threatened with dire consequences by the private respondents No. 4 to 6. Resultantly, a representation dated 09.06.2025 (Annexure P-5) was also made to respondent No.2Senior Superintendent of Police, (Rural), Jalandhar wherein a mention has been made about the alleged threat perception. Learned counsel submits that despite the official respondents having been communicated about the alleged threat perception, no steps have been taken to come to the rescue of the petitioners. Learned counsel submits that he would be satisfied if directions are issued to respondent No.2- Senior Superintendent of Police, (Rural), Jalandhar to look into their representation/complaint dated 09.06.2025 (Annexure P-5) and take appropriate steps at the earliest.
3.
Notice of motion to respondents No. 1 to 3 only. 4.
At the asking of the Court, Mr. Gautam Thapar, Sr. DAG, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of respondents No. 1 to 3. 5.
Keeping in view the mandate of Supreme Court in the case of "Lata Singh V. State of U.P. and another", JT 2006 (6) SC 173, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to
respondent No.2 Senior Superintendent of Police, (Rural), Jalandhar to look into the matter and take appropriate action in accordance with law to ensure that no harm is caused to the life and liberty of the petitioners at the hands of private respondents.
6.
It is clarified that this order shall not be treated as a stamp of this Court about the marriage of the parties and no opinion with regard to the validity of the marriage has been expressed in this order."
3.
Keeping in view the aforesaid facts, this writ petition is rendered infructuous and is disposed of as such. (Anil Kshetarpal) Judge June 16, 2025 "DK"
Whether speaking/reasoned :Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No