High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRWP/8194/2024disposed of

Reema Rani And Another v. State Of Haryana And Others

2024-08-28Mr. Justice Rajesh Bhardwaj2 pages

CRWP-8194-2024 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRWP-8194-2024 Date of Decision: August 28, 2024 Reema Rani and another ......Petitioners

Versus

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

Present:

Mr.Sandeep Kumar Tada, Advocate for the petitioners.

........

RAJESH BHARDWAJ, J.(ORAL) Present petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for directing respondents No.2 and 3 to protect the life and liberty of the petitioners from the hands of respondents No.4 to 6 and restrain them not to harass or interfere in their peaceful married life. Learned counsel for the petitioners states that both the petitioners are major and have married against the wishes of respondents No.4 to 6 and have sought protection to their life and liberty. They apprehend danger from respondents No.4 to 6. Their marriage certificate evidencing their marriage is on record as Annexure P-3. The petitioners have submitted a representation, dated 22.08.2024 (Annexure P-4) to respondent No.2.

Notice of motion to respondents No.1 to 3-State only. On asking of the Court, Mr.Sumit Jain, Additional Advocate MEENU 2024.08.28 17:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRWP-8194-2024 -2General, Haryana, 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-Superintendent of Police, Sirsa, District Sirsa, Haryana to decide the representation (Annexure P-4) of the petitioners and grant them protection, 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 the marriage of the petitioners. August 28, 2024 ( RAJESH BHARDWAJ ) meenuss JUDGE 1.

Whether speaking/reasoned ?

Yes/No 2.

Whether reportable ?

Yes/No MEENU 2024.08.28 17:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document