Nishu And ANR v. State Of Haryana And ORS

CRWP-9206-2024 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRWP-9206-2024 Date of Decision: September 23, 2024 Nishu and another ......Petitioners

Versus

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

Present:

Mr.Ankur Malik, 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 protect the life and liberty of the petitioners and also direct respondent No.4 not to interfere in the personal lives and liberty of the petitioners and further direct respondents No.2 and 3 not to allow/let respondent No.4 or anybody else to interfere with the liberty and lives of the petitioners or harass them in any manner against their wishes or to cause any detriment to them in any manner.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioners states that both the petitioners are major and are living together against the wishes of respondent No.4 and have sought protection to their life and liberty. They apprehend danger from respondent No.4. The petitioners have submitted a representation, dated 14.09.2024 (Annexure P-5) to respondent No.2. 3.

Notice of motion to respondents no.1 to 3-State only. MEENU 2024.09.23 16:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRWP-9206-2024 -24.

On the asking of the Court, Mr.Sumit Jain, Additional Advocate General, Haryana, 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-Commissioner of Police, Gurgaon, Haryana 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 their live-in-relationship. September 23, 2024 ( RAJESH BHARDWAJ ) meenuss JUDGE 1.

Whether speaking/reasoned ?

Yes/No 2.

Whether reportable ?

Yes/No MEENU 2024.09.23 16:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document