High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRWP/7441/2024disposed of

Sonali And ANR v. State Of Punjab And Others

2024-08-05Mr. Justice Rajesh Bhardwaj2 pages

CRWP-7441-2024 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRWP-7441-2024 Date of Decision: August 05, 2024 Sonali and another ......Petitioners

Versus

State of Punjab and others ......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ

Present:

Ms.Manpreet Kaur Ghuman, Advocate for the petitioner through VC.

........

RAJESH BHARDWAJ, J.(ORAL) Present petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India directing respondents no.2 and 3 to protect the life and liberty of the petitioners from the hands of respondent no.4. It is further prayed that respondent No.4 or anybody else be not allowed to interfere with the liberty and lives of the petitioners or harass them in any manner against their wishes and detriment them by using force or by adopting unlawful means.

Learned counsel for the petitioners states that both the petitioners are major and are living together in live-in-relationship against the wishes of respondent no.4 and have sought protection to their life and liberty. They apprehend danger from respondent no.4. Petitioner No.1 has submitted a representation, dated 18.07.2024 (Annexure P-3) to respondent no.2.

Notice of motion to respondents no.1 to 3-State only. MEENU 2024.08.06 10:59 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRWP-7441-2024 -2On the asking of the Court, Mr.Tarun Aggarwal, Sr.DAG, Punjab, who is present in Court, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents/State.

Without entering upon an exercise to evaluate the evidentiary value of the documents placed on the file, I dispose of the petition with a direction to respondent no.2-Senior Superintendent of Police, Mohali, to decide the representation (Annexure P-3) of petitioner No.1 and grant protection to the petitioners, if any threat to their life and liberty is perceived. It is clarified that this order shall not be taken to grant immunity to the petitioners from legal action for violation of law, if any, committed by them. This order would not be understood having expressed any opinion whatsoever by this Court on the validity of their live-in-relationship. August 05, 2024 ( RAJESH BHARDWAJ ) meenuss JUDGE 1.

Whether speaking/reasoned ?

Yes/No 2.

Whether reportable ?

Yes/No MEENU 2024.08.06 10:59 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document