Priyanka And Another v. State Of Punjab And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRWP-10824-2022 Decided on : 17.11.2022 Priyanka and another . . . Petitioner(s)

Versus

State of Punjab and others . . . Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH PRESENT: Mr. Mohit Kakkar, Advocate for the petitioners.

**** SANJAY VASHISTH , J. (Oral) By way of filing this petition, petitioners seek necessary protection of their lives and personal liberty in view of the fact that they have not solemnized their marriage so far and are living in a live-in relationship and are under eminent threat at the hands of respondents No.4 & 5. Petitioner No.1 - Priyanka, who is now 30 years & 10 of months years old, was earlier married to one Shiv Kumar (respondent No.4) on 12.10.2009, and one boy was borne out of this wedlock, who is now 11 years of age. In fact, petitioner No.1 was perturbed with the bad behaviour and habits of respondent No.4, who is a drug addict, and use to beat her. With the passage of time, both the petitioners came into contact with each other and started living together, and have approached this Court for seeking protection qua their live in-relationship.

In the context of threat perception at the hands of private respondents No.4 & 5, petitioners have allegedly moved representation dated 11.11.2022 (Annexure P-3) to the Sr. Superintendent of Police, Moga, wherein, all the apprehensions qua their lives and liberty has been expressed. Notice of motion to respondents No.1 to 3.

JAWALA RAM 2022.11.17 17:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRWP-10824-2022 - 2 - On asking of the Court, Mr. AS Sandhu, AAG, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of State-respondents No.1 to 3. Since, petitioners have not contracted any marriage and seek only protection qua their lives and personal liberty; it would be appropriate to direct respondent No.2 to examine the representation dated 11.11.2022 (Annexure P-3), and to have a fair look on the grievance of the petitioners in order to ascertain veracity of allegations made by the petitioners. Respondent No.2 would be at liberty to devise his/her own mechanism to ascertain the truth. He/she would also be at liberty to join the petitioners or any other person acquainted with facts in issue. If the innocence of the petitioners is established, respondent No.

2 shall proceed to take appropriate action in order to protect lives and personal liberty of the petitioners from being invaded by private respondents No.4 & 5. Aforesaid order is being passed at this stage without meaning anything on the status of the parties on the basis of live-in relationship and age of petitioners. Respondent No.2 would consider and pass necessary order without being influenced by any statement of fact recorded hereinabove.

Petition stands disposed of accordingly.

(SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE November 17, 2022 J.Ram Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether Reportable:

Yes/No JAWALA RAM 2022.11.17 17:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document