Smriti And ANR v. State Of Haryana And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: September 10th, 2024 Smriti and another .....Petitioners

Versus

State of Haryana and others .....Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL

Present:

Mr. Vikramjit Singh, Advocate with Mr. O.P. Jindal, Advocate for the petitioners.

MANJARI NEHRU KAUL , J. (ORAL) Prayer in the instant petition filed under Article 226/27 of the Constitution of India is for issuance of directions to respondents No.2 and 3, to protect the life and liberty of the petitioners at the hands of private respondents No.4 to 8 (family members/relatives of petitioner No.1), who are averse to their live-in relationship. 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have been in a live-in relationship and they are continuously being threatened with dire consequences by the private respondents. Hence, there is a genuine apprehension of the life of the petitioners being in peril. Resultantly, a representation dated 05.09.2024 (Annexure P-4) was also made to respondent No.2-Superintendent of Police, Karnal, for protection of their life and liberty, but in vain. Learned counsel submits that the petitioners would be satisfied if directions are issued to respondent No.2-Superintendent of Police, Karnal, to look into their representation (Annexure P-4) and take appropriate steps at the earliest.

-23.

On a pointed query put to the learned counsel about the age of petitioner No.1, he has drawn the attention of this Court to her Aadhaar Card (Annexure P-1), wherein it stands reflected that her date of birth is 25.06.2005 and hence, it has been asserted that she has attained the age of majority. On a further query put to the learned counsel as to for how long the parties have been in a live-in relationship, it has been submitted that they have been living together since 05.09.2024.

4.

Notice of motion to official respondents only. 5.

On asking of the Court, Ms. Trishanjali Sharma, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana, accepts notice on behalf of the official respondents.

6.

Mr. Ashish Sindher, Advocate, has entered appearance on behalf of respondents No.4 to 8 and filed his power of attorney, which is taken on record. He has not disputed that petitioner No.1 has indeed attained the age of majority, however, he submits that false allegations have been levelled against the private respondent that they have been extending threats of dire consequences to the petitioners on account of their alleged live-in relationship. It has also been submitted by the learned counsel that a criminal case under Sections 87 and 137 of the BNS has been registered against petitioner No.2. 7.

Be that as it may, the present petition is disposed of with a directions to respondent No.2-Superintendent of Police, Karnal, to look into the representation dated 05.09.2024 (Annexure P-4) qua the alleged threat perception and take necessary steps, as may be required, in accordance with law, to ensure that the life and liberty of the petitioners is not jeopardized at the hands of the private respondents. However, this

-3direction will have no effect on any civil or criminal action, which could be initiated in the matter in accordance with law. September 10th, 2024 (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) Puneet JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes Whether reportable :

No