High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRWP/8776/2024disposed of

Bhavana And ANR v. State Of Punjab And ORS

2024-09-10Mr. Justice Rajesh Bhardwaj2 pages

CRWP-8776-2024 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRWP-8776-2024 Date of Decision: September 10, 2024 Bhavana and another ......Petitioners

Versus

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

Present:

Mr.Ashdeep Singh, Advocate for the petitioners.

........

RAJESH BHARDWAJ, J.(ORAL) 1.

Present petition has been filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for directing respondents No.2 and 3 to protect the life and personal liberty of the petitioners by providing sufficient and meaningful police protection to the petitioners since the petitioners have solemnized love marriage against the wishes of respondents No.4 to 6. 2.

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 photographs and marriage certificate evidencing their marriage are on record as Annexures P-3 and P-4. The petitioners have submitted a representation dated 08.09.2024 (Annexure P-5) to respondent No.2. 3.

Notice of motion to respondents No.1 to 3-State only. MEENU 2024.09.10 16:39 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 4.

On asking of the Court, Mr.Tarun Aggarwal, Sr.DAG, Punjab,

CRWP-8776-2024 -2who is present in Court, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents/State. 5.

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, SAS Nagar, Mohali, to decide the representation (Annexure P-5) 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. September 10, 2024 ( RAJESH BHARDWAJ ) meenuss JUDGE 1.

Whether speaking/reasoned ?

Yes/No 2.

Whether reportable ?

Yes/No MEENU 2024.09.10 16:39 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document