Rajji And Another v. State Of Punjab And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRWP-10193-2024 Date of Decision: October 22, 2024 RAJJI AND ANOTHER ....Petitioner(s)

VERSUS

STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS ....Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE AMARJOT BHATTI

Present:

Mr. Rahul Tomar, Advocate with Mr. Lalit Sharma, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Kewal Singh, Addl. A.G., Punjab.

Mr. F.S. Virk, Advocate for respondent No.4.

**** AMARJOT BHATTI , J.(ORAL) 1.

Petitioner No.1 Rajji aged about 18 years, petitioner No.2 Sukhpreet Singh aged about 21 years have filed petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of writ in the nature of mandamus directing respondent Nos.2 and 3 to protect their life and liberty from the hands of respondent No.4 who is father of petitioner No.1.

2.

Today, Mr. F.S. Virk, Advocate, puts in appearance on behalf of respondent No.4 and has filed his memo of appearance in Court, which is taken on record. It was requested that father may be permitted to meet the petitioners.

3.

At 2 PM, both the parties have come present in the Court. Petitioner No.1 does not want to have any contact with her father i.e. respondent No.4 out of fear. Whereas respondent No.4 is insisting SANGEETA 2024.10.23 13:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRWP-10193-2024 that petitioner No.1 should return home and thereafter they will send her with petitioner No.2.

4.

Both the petitioners have insisted that they have already performed marriage and they are living happily. They are not agreeing to this arrangement.

5.

Respondent No.4 stated that now he has no concern with the petitioners and he will not interfere in their married life. 6.

Considering the aforesaid factual position, at present there is no immediate threat to the petitioners, even then petitioners apprehend any threat perception then they may approach respondent Nos.2 and 3 who will take appropriate steps considering the threat perception.

7.

Petition is accordingly disposed of.

8.

Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stand disposed of accordingly as well.

(AMARJOT BHATTI) October 22, 2024 JUDGE Sangeeta Whether reasoned/speaking:

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No SANGEETA 2024.10.23 13:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document