Jyoti And Another v. State Of Punjab And Others

CRWP-8821-2024 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRWP-8821-2024 Date of Decision: September 11, 2024 Jyoti and another ......Petitioners

Versus

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

Present:

Mr.Parvesh Sachdeva, Advocate for the petitioners.

........

RAJESH BHARDWAJ, J.(ORAL) 1.

Present petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for directing respondents No.2 and 3 to give police protection to the petitioners and also issue a direction to respondents No.4 to 7 not to interfere with the liberty and married life of the petitioners in any manner and against their wishes and not to detriment them by using force on them or by adopting unlawful means and further for directing respondents No.2 and 3 not to harass the petitioners and family members of petitioner No.2 at the instance of respondents No.4 to 7. 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioners states that both the petitioners are major and have married against the wishes of respondents No.4 to 7 and have sought protection to their life and liberty. They apprehend danger from respondents No.4 to 7. Their marriage certificate and photographs evidencing their marriage are on record as Annexures P-3 and MEENU 2024.09.12 15:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document P-4. The petitioners have submitted a representation, dated 06.09.2024,

CRWP-8821-2024 -2- (Annexure P-5) to respondent No.2.

3.

Notice of motion to respondents No.1 to 3-State only. 4.

On asking of the Court, Mr.Tarun Aggarwal, Sr.DAG, Punjab, who 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, Fazilka, 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 11, 2024 ( RAJESH BHARDWAJ ) meenuss JUDGE 1.

Whether speaking/reasoned ?

Yes/No 2.

Whether reportable ?

Yes/No MEENU 2024.09.12 15:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document