Taaleem And ANR v. State Of Haryana And Others

2024:PHHC:001692

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRWP-11252-2023 (O&M) Date of Decision : January 09, 2024 TAALEEM AND ANR -PETITIONERS V/S STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS -RESPONDENTS

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP TIWARI

Present:

Ms. Sunita Saini, Advocate for Ms. Kusum Raj, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr. Bhupender Singh, D.A.G., Haryana.

*** KULDEEP TIWARI, J. (ORAL) 1.

Through the instant petition, as filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners, who are in a 'live-in relationship', have sought issuance of directions upon the respondents No.1 to 3, to ensure protection of their lives and liberty at the hands of respondents No.4 to 10.

2.

What further erupts from a naked eye scrutiny of the instant petition, as also the representation (Annexure P-3), is that, only bald and vague allegations, qua threats being extended to the petitioners by the private respondents, are made therein. Neither any supportive material has been placed on record by the petitioners to corroborate their allegations, nor even any single instance pertaining to the manner and mode of alleged threats being extended to the petitioners has been anywhere disclosed. Therefore, such bald and vague allegations cannot be readily and naively DEVINDER YADAV 2024.01.10 09:59 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

CRWP-11252-2023 (O&M) 2024:PHHC:001692 accepted by this Court, in the absence of any valid and convincing material in support thereof.

3.

Moreover, the learned State counsel, on instructions imparted to him by ASI Shiv Parkash, has informed this Court that though the petitioners are untraceable, however, the statement(s) of private respondents concerned has been recorded, wherein, it has been stated that the private respondents have already disowned the petitioners and now they do not have any concern or connection with them and as such, the petitioners do not have any threat perception at the hands of private respondents.

4.

In view of the above, since neither there is any threat perception to the petitioners, nor the petitioners require any security cover at present, therefore, the present petition is dismissed, as having been rendered infructuous.

5.

Pending application(s) stand disposed of accordingly. (KULDEEP TIWARI) January 09, 2024 JUDGE devinder Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether Reportable :

Yes/No DEVINDER YADAV 2024.01.10 09:59 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment