Sukhpreet Kaur And Another vs State Of Punjab And Others
2022 Latest Caselaw 7807 P&H

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                       CHANDIGARH
121
                                            CRWP-7131-2022 (O&M)
                                            Date of decision: 26.07.2022
SUKHPREET KAUR AND ANR
                                                                  ...Petitioners
                                   Versus
STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS
                                                               .....Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARNARESH SINGH GILL


Present:-   Mr. Gulrej Khan, Advocate for
            Mr. Sandeep Kumar Bansal, Advocate,
            for the petitioners.


HARNARESH SINGH GILL, J. (ORAL)

This petition has been filed under Article 226 of the

Constitution of India for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus

directing the official respondents to protect the life and liberty of the

petitioners at the hands of the private respondents.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioner

No.1 is major, but petitioner No.2-boy, though major, yet not of a

marriageable age and that the petitioners are living together in live-in

relationship. He further submits that parents of petitioners were informed,

but they are issuing threats to the petitioners regarding their live-in

relationship. The petitioners have already submitted a representation

dated 21.07.2022 (Annexure P-5) to respondent No.2-Senior

Superintendent of Police, Police Station Thuliwal, District Barnala, for

redressal of their grievance, but no action has been taken thereupon.

Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that the

1 of 3

121 CRWP-7131-2022 (O&M) -2-

petitioners are living in a constant danger as they have every

apprehension that the private respondents would catch them and carry out

their threats and might go to the extent of even committing their murder.

The petitioners are, therefore, running from pillar to posts for protection

of their life and liberty.

In support of his contentions, learned counsel for the

petitioners relies upon the judgment delivered by the Hon'ble Apex Court

in Nandakumar and Anr. Vs. The State of Kerala and others, 2018(2)

RCR(Civil) 899.

Notice of motion to the respondents No.1 to 3-State only.

On the asking of this Court, Mr. Harbir Sandhu, AAG

Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of respondents No.1 to 3-State only.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.

Article 21 of the Constitution stipulates protection of life and

liberty to every citizen and that no person shall be deprived of his life and

personal liberty except according to procedure established by law.

It is the bounden duty of the State as per the Constitutional

obligations caste upon it to protect the life and liberty of every citizen.

Mere fact that petitioner No.2 is not of a marriageable age would not

deprive the petitioners of their fundamental right as envisaged in the

Constitution, being citizens of India.

In view of the above discussion, I dispose of the present

petition with a direction to respondent No.2-Senior Superintendent of

Police, Police Station Thuliwal, District Barnala, to decide the

2 of 3

121 CRWP-7131-2022 (O&M) -3-

representation dated 21.07.2022 (Annexure P-5), moved by the

petitioners in accordance with law and grant protection to them, if any

threat to their life and liberty is perceived.

It is made clear that this order shall not be taken to protect

the petitioners from legal action for violation of law if any committed by

them.

                                             (HARNARESH SINGH GILL)
26.07.2022                                         JUDGE
Aman Jain
             Whether reasoned/speaking?          Yes/No
             Whether reportable?                 Yes/No




                                    3 of 3