Mamta Rani And Another v. State Of Punjab And Others

CRWP-10814-2024 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRWP-10814-2024 Date of Decision: November 11, 2024 Mamta Rani and another ......Petitioners

Versus

State of Punjab and others ......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ

Present:

Mr.Ashadveer Singh, Advocate and Mr.Karandeep Singh Dargan, Advocate for the petitioners.

........

RAJESH BHARDWAJ, J.(ORAL) 1.

Present petition has been filed under Articles 226 of the Constitution of India for directing official respondents to protect the life and liberty of the petitioners from the hands of private respondents. 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that both the petitioners were earlier married. Petitioner No.1 was earlier married with respondent No.6 and she is living separately from him and no child was born out of that marriage. It is submitted that though petitioner No.2 was also earlier married however, his wife has expired and there is one child also out of that marriage and that child is now living with petitioner No.2. It is submitted that both the petitioners are major and are living together in livein-relationship against the wishes of private respondents and have sought protection to their life and liberty. They apprehend danger from private respondents. The petitioners have submitted a representation, dated MEENU 2024.11.11 17:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRWP-10814-2024 -204.11.2024 (Annexure P-3) to respondent No.2. 3.

Notice of motion to respondents no.1 to 3-State only. 4.

On the asking of the Court, Mr.Tarun Aggarwal, Sr.DAG, Punjab, who is present in Court, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents/State.

5.

Without entering upon an exercise to evaluate the evidentiary value of the documents placed on the file, I dispose of the petition with a direction to respondent No.2-Senior Superintendent of Police, Fazilka, Punjab, to decide the representation (Annexure P-3) of the petitioners and grant them protection, if any threat to their life and liberty is perceived. It is clarified that this order shall not be taken to grant immunity to the petitioners from legal action for violation of law, if any, committed by them. This order would not be understood having expressed any opinion whatsoever by this Court on the validity of their live-in-relationship. November 11, 2024 ( RAJESH BHARDWAJ ) meenuss JUDGE 1.

Whether speaking/reasoned ?

Yes/No 2.

Whether reportable ?

Yes/No MEENU 2024.11.11 17:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document