Rajbir Masih And Another vs State Of Punjab And Others
2022 Latest Caselaw 11757 P&H

                        CRWP-9061-2022                                               1

                               IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                                                     CHANDIGARH
                                                    CRWP-9061-2022

                                          Date of Decision: September 20, 2022

                        Rajbir Masih and another
                                                                                         ...Petitioners
                                                           Versus
                        State of Punjab and others
                                                                                         ...Respondent

                        CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH

                        Present:     Mr. Rajender Kumar Dhania, Advocate,
                                     for the petitioners.

                                     Mr. J.S. Arora, DAG, Punjab.


                        SANJAY VASHISTH, J.

By way of filing this petition, petitioners seek necessary

protection of their lives and personal liberties in view of the fact that they

have not solemnized their marriage so far and are living in the live-in

relationship and are under eminent threats at the hands of respondents

No.4 to 7. Petitioner No.1 - Rajbir Masih is aged about 20 years,

therefore, not of marriageable age, whereas petitioner No. 2 - Bhavna is

more than 20 years old.

In the context of threat perception at the hands of private

respondents No.4 to 7, petitioners have allegedly moved representation

dated 15.09.2022 (Annexure P-4) to the Senior Superintendent of Police,

Amritsar Rural, District Amritsar (respondent No. 2), wherein, all the

apprehension to their lives has been expressed.

Notice of motion to respondents No.1 to 3.

PRASHANT KAPOOR 2022.09.20 19:04 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

On asking of the Court, Mr. J.S. Arora, Deputy Advocate

General, Punjab, who is present in Court, accepts notice on behalf of

State-respondents No.1 to 3.

Since the petitioners have not contracted any marriage and

seek only protection qua their lives and personal liberties, therefore, it

would be appropriate to direct respondent No. 2, to have a fair look on

the grievance of the petitioners in order to ascertain veracity of

allegations made by the petitioners.

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

liberties of the petitioners from being invaded by private respondents No.

4 to 7.

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. Respondent No. 2 would pass necessary order without being

influenced by any statement of fact recorded here-in-above.

Petition stands disposed of accordingly.

                                                                    (SANJAY VASHISTH)
                                                                          JUDGE
                        September 20, 2022
                        Pkapoor          Whether Speaking/Reasoned:        YES/NO
                                         Whether Reportable:               YES/NO

PRASHANT KAPOOR
2022.09.20 19:04
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this
order/judgment