Parwinder Kaur And ANR. v. State Of Punjab And Others
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH CRWP-11588-2022 Decided on : 25.01.2023 Parwinder Kaur and another . . . Petitioner(s)
Versus
State of Punjab and others . . . Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH PRESENT: None for the petitioner(s).
Mr. Anmol Singh Sandhu, AAG, Punjab for respondents No.1 to 3.
**** SANJAY VASHISTH , J. (Oral) Instant petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India is for seeking directions to respondents No.2 and 3 for protection of lives and liberty of petitioners from the hands of private respondents No. 4 to 8.
Although there was no notice, yet on advance notice, Mr. Dinesh Kumar, Advocate, puts in appearance on behalf of respondents No.4 to 8 and files his Vakalatnama in Court today, which is taken on record, subject to all just exceptions.
Counsel appearing for respondents No.4 to 8 points out that petitioner No.1 was already married to Sonu Singh-respondent No.4 and from the said wedlock, a son was also born.
Counsel further submits that due to some temperamental differences, petitioner No.1-Parwinder Kaur had left matrimonial home as well as her parental home and started living with petitioner No.2-Hardeep Singh. However, a good sense has now prevailed to her and has now come KAVITA NAIN 2023.01.25 15:39 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document order/judgment
CRWP-11588-2022 - 2 - back to her parental home i.e. to respondents No.5 to 8. On 09.12.2022, counsel for the petitioners did not appear and the matter was adjourned to 22.12.2022.
Again, despite calling the case twice, there was no representation from the side of petitioners on 22.12.2022. Today again, there is no representation on behalf of counsel for petitioners.
Dismissed for non-prosecution.
(SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE January 25, 2023 k.nain Whether speaking/reasoned:
Yes/No Whether Reportable:
Yes/No KAVITA NAIN 2023.01.25 15:39 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document order/judgment