Nisha And ANR v. State Of Haryana And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Decided on: 31.10.2024 Nisha and another

...Petitioners

Versus

State of Haryana and others

...Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH

Present:

Mr. Yavneet Dhakla, Advocate, for the petitioners.

Ms. Mamta Singla Talwar, DAG, Haryana **** SANJAY VASHISTH, J. (Oral) 1.

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 to 8. 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are in a live-in relationship against the wishes of respondent No. 4 to 8 and have sought protection to their life and liberty. It is submitted that petitioner No. 1 - Nisha, is aged 25 years and petitioner No. 2 - Bharat, is aged 20 years, and they apprehend danger at the hands of private respondents No. 4 to 8, who will eliminate them if they intend to solemnize the marriage at relevant time. 3.

In the context of threat perception at the hands of private respondents No. 4 to 8, petitioners have allegedly moved representation dated 29.10.2024 (Annexure P-4), to the Superintendent of Police, Bhiwani

(respondent No. 2), wherein, all the apprehensions qua their lives and liberty has been expressed.

4.

Notice of motion.

5.

On advance notice, Ms. Mamta Singla Talwar, DAG, Haryana, puts in appearance on behalf of respondents No.1 to 3 (State). 6.

Since, petitioners have not contracted any marriage and seek only protection qua their lives and personal liberty, and for the same already representation dated 29.10.2024 (Annexure P-4) is pending, it would be appropriate to direct respondent No. 2 to have a fair look to the said representation, on the grievance of the petitioners in order to ascertain veracity of allegations made by them.

7.

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, then 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 to 8.

8.

The 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 herein-above.

9.

It is also made clear that this order is subject to the supply of copy of complete paper book to the learned State counsel during day course

by the learned counsel for the petitioners.

Petition stands disposed of accordingly.

(SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE October 31, 2024 Pkapoor Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether Reportable:

Yes/No