Sadhna And ANR. v. State Of Haryana And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRWP-10807-2022 Decided on : 17.11.2022 Sadhna and another . . . Petitioner(s)

Versus

State of Haryana and others . . . Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH PRESENT: Mr. S.S. Kainth, Advocate and Mr. Deepak K. Bartia, 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, as petitioner No.2 is not of marriageable age, and are under eminent threat at the hands of respondents No.4 & 5.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are in a live-in relationship against the wishes of respondents No. 4 & 5, and have sought protection to their life and liberty. It is submitted that petitioner No. 1-Sadhna, is aged 18 years and petitioner No. 2 - Pankaj Kumar, is aged about 20 years and they apprehend danger at the hands of private respondents No.4 & 5, who will eliminate them if they intend to solemnize the marriage at relevant time.

In the context of threat perception at the hands of private respondents No.4 & 5, petitioners have allegedly moved representation dated 14.11.2022 (Annexure P-4) to the Superintendent of Police, Yamuna Nagar, 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-10807-2022 - 2 - On asking of the Court, Mr. Vikas Bhardwaj, AAG, Haryana 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 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