Urmala Devi And ANR v. State Of Punjab And Others

-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ***** Date of Decision: 01.01.2021 Urmala Devi and another ....Petitioners

Versus

State of Punjab and others .....Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASGURPREET SINGH PURI Present :

Mr. Mukesh Singla, Advocate, for the petitioners.

Through Video Conferencing JASGURPREET SINGH PURI , J. (Oral) The present petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ for protection of life and liberty for the petitioners from the hands of private respondent Nos.5 to 11. The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that petitioner No.1 is widow and petitioner No.2 is her minor son of 04 years. He has further submitted that during the life time of her husband, the private respondents had been treating petitioner No.1 with cruelty and due to this reason, the husband of petitioner No.1 remained ill for long time and thereafter, he died. Now, after the death of the husband of petitioner No.1, the private respondents are illegally and forcibly taking away the property of petitioner No.1 and they have also evicted her from the house and also threatened to kill her and her son in order to take their property. He has further submitted that repeated representations have been filed to the police vide Annexures P-3, P-7 and P-8 but no action has been taken by the police.

-2The learned counsel for the petitioners has categorically stated that he is confining his prayer only for the grant of protection of life and liberty and he is not pressing any prayer with regard to any interse dispute between the petitioners and the private respondents with regard to the property or otherwise and prays that he may be granted protection for the life and liberty of the petitioners.

Notice of motion to the respondent No.1 to 4 only. On asking of the Court, Ms. Monika Jalota, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. Since, the learned counsel for the petitioners has confined the scope of the present petition only with regard to the protection of life and liberty of the petitioners and has categorically stated that he does not wish to press for any relief with regard to any dispute either with regard to property or otherwise inter se between the petitioners and the private respondents, this court is satisfied that this petition can be disposed of by issuing directions to respondent No.3-Senior Superintendent of Police, Patiala, to look into the representations filed by petitioner No.

1 especially representations (Annexures P-3, P-7 and P-8) within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order and to assess the threat perception of the petitioners in this regard. Thereafter, the Senior Superintendent of Police, Patiala, if so required, shall proceed to take such measures which are required in accordance with law.

-3any other subject apart from the protection of life and liberty. Disposed of.

(JASGURPREET SINGH PURI) 01.01.2021 JUDGE adhikari Whether speaking/non-speaking :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No