Kaju And Anr vs State Of Haryana And Others
2022 Latest Caselaw 14283 P&H

119         IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                         AT CHANDIGARH

                                                CRWP-10697-2022
                                                Date of Decision: 14.11.2022


Kaju and another                                             ...Petitioners

                                        vs.

State of Haryana and others                                ...Respondents

Coram :       Hon'ble Mr. Justice N.S.Shekhawat

Present :     Mr. Pardeep Sihmar, Advocate
              for the petitioners.

                    ***

N.S.Shekhawat J. (Oral)

This petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of

India for directing respondents No. 2 and 3 to protect the life and liberty of the

petitioners from the hands of private respondents.

Learned counsel for the petitioners states that though petitioner No.

1 is major, age of petitioner No.2- Aman Kumar, is 17 years and 08 months and

want to marry each other after attaining the age of majority of petitioner No. 2

but the family members of petitioner No.1 are against their relationship. He

further submits that both the petitioners have been living together in live-in

relationship at the address of petitioner No. 2 and facing threat from the family

members of petitioner No. 1 and in this regard, they have also moved a

representation dated 07.11.2022 (Annexure P-3) to Superintendent of Police,

Rohtak-respondent No. 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that the

petitioners are living in a constant danger as they have every apprehension that

respondents No. 4 and 5 would catch them and carry out their threats and might

1 of 3

go to the extent of even committing their murder. The petitioners are, therefore,

running from pillar to post for protection of their life and liberty.

In support of his contentions, learned counsel for the petitioners

relies upon the judgments passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in

'Nandakumar and another Vs. State of Kerala and others' 2018(2) RCR

(Civil) 899; and Indra Sarma Vs. V.K.V. Sarma' 2013(15) SCC 755 and the

judgment passed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in CWP-17069- 2019

titled as Kawaljeet Kaur and another versus State of Punjab and others.

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

On the asking of this Court, Mr. Rajinder Kumar, Deputy Advocate

General, Haryana, accepts notice on behalf of respondents No.1 to 3.

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-Aman Kumar, is not of a marriageable age would not

deprive the petitioners of their fundamental right as envisaged in the

Constitution, being citizens of India.

Without commenting upon the marital status or live-in relationship

of the petitioners, I dispose of the petition with directions to respondent No. 2-

Superintendent of Police, Rohtak to decide the representation dated 07.11.2022

(Annexure P-3), moved by the petitioners, in accordance with law and grant

protection to them, if any threat to their life and liberty is perceived.

2 of 3

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.

                                                     (N.S.SHEKHAWAT)
14.11.2022                                                 JUDGE
hemlata

                   Whether speaking/reasoned :          Yes/No
                   Whether reportable            :      Yes/No




                                        3 of 3