Punjab-Haryana High Court
Jyoti And Another vs State Of Punjab And Others on 22 March, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
SR. No.109
CRWP-2369-2022
Date of Decision:22.03.2022
Jyoti and another
...Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and others
...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANT PARKASH
Present: Mr. K.S. Dargan, Advocate,
for the petitioners.
(Petitioners are present through whatsapp video call)
SANT PARKASH, J.
The petitioners, who are of the age of 20 and 19 years
respectively as per their Voter ID Card/Aadhar Card, have approached this
Court seeking protection of their life and liberty on the averments that they
are living together in a live-in relationship against the wishes of respondents
No.4 to 9 and the petitioners are apprehending threat to their life and liberty
at their instance.
It is averred in the petition that the petitioners are known to
each other from the last three years and now, family members of petitioner
No.1, who are against the love affair and live-in relationship of the
petitioners, are threatening to kill them by tracing them from anywhere.
Learned counsel for the petitioners places reliance upon a
Division Bench judgment of this Court rendered in LPA No.1678 of 2014
titled as "Rajwinder Kaur and another Vs State of Punjab and others,
2014 (4) RCR (Criminal) 785" to support his claim.
He further submits that a representation dated 11.03.2022 (P-3)
1 of 3
was made to the Senior Superintendent of Police, Ferozepur, seeking
necessary protection but no action has been taken so far in the matter and
prays for issuance of direction in this regard.
Notice of motion restricted to respondents No.1 to 3 only at this
stage.
Mr. V.G. Jauhar, Sr, DAG, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of
respondents No.1 to 3. Copy of the paper book has already been supplied to
learned State counsel by the Registry.
I have heard counsel for the parties and with their assistance
have gone through the pleadings of the case.
The petitioners have approached this court under Article 226 of
Constitution of India seeking protection of their life and liberty at the hands
of the private respondents, with a further prayer that they be restrained from
interfering in the peaceful live-in relationship of the petitioners. The
petitioners have not approached this court either seeking permission to
marry or for approval of their relationship. The limited prayer as noted is for
grant of protection to them, fearing the ire of family members of petitioner
No.1, on account of their decision to reside together.
This Court in the past and also recently has allowed protection
to those runaway couples, even though they were not married and were in a
live-in relationship and in cases where the marriage was invalid (as one of
the parties though a major, was not of age as per Section 5 of the Hindu
Marriage Act). Moreover, it is the fundamental right of the parties to seek
protection from the Court and it is the duty of the Court to protect the life
and liberty of the petitioners. Reference in this regard can be made in
2 of 3
Rajwinder Kaur's case (supra) as well as Single Bench judgment rendered
in CRWP No.4533 of 2021, titled as "Soniya and another vs. State of
Haryana and others", where it was held that marriage is not a must for
security to be provided to a runaway couple. The police authorities were
directed to ensure that no harm was caused by any one to the life and liberty
of the couple.
Without entering upon an exercise to evaluate the evidentiary
value of the documents placed on the file, I dispose of this petition with
directions to respondent No.2-Senior Superintendent of Police, Ferozepur,
to decide the representation of the petitioners (Annexure P-3) within a
period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and grant
them protection, 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.
Registry is directed to send a copy of this order along with copy
of the petition and above said representation to respondent No.2-Senior
Superintendent of Police, Ferozepur, for requisite compliance.
22.03.2022 (SANT PARKASH)
mks JUDGE
Whether Speaking/Reasoned: YES / NO
Whether Reportable: YES / NO
3 of 3
