Punjab-Haryana High Court
Raman Bala And Another vs State Of Haryana And Others on 1 July, 2024
Author: Kirti Singh
Bench: Kirti Singh
KAPIL
2024.07.01 17:29
CRWP-6123-2024 (O&M) 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
Sr. No.115 CRWP-6123-2024 (O&M)
Date of decision : 01.07.2024
Raman Balaandanother oa. Petitioners
VERSUS
StateofHaryanaandothers a Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE KIRTI SINGH
Present: Mr. Vijay Deep, Advocate, for the petitioners.
36 2 2s 24s 2k
KIRTI_ SINGH, J. (Oral)
This petition has been filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India for issuance of a direction to the official respondents
No.1 to 3 for the protection of the life and liberty of the petitioners from the
private respondents No.4 to 8.
2. The petitioner No.1 is stated to be born in the year 1988 and she
is more than 36 years of age and for the said purpose, reference has been
made to the Aadhar Card (Annexure Pl). The date of birth of petitioner
No.2 is 24.08.1992 and he is 32 years of old. A true copy of the Aadhar
Card of petitioner No.2 is attached herewith as (Annexure P2). It is stated
that the petitioners are in a live in relationship.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has placed reliance on the
judgments passed by this Court in CRWP-4521-2021 titled as Pardeep
Singh and another Vs. State of Haryana and others decided on
18.05.2021 and CRWP-4905-2024 titled as Yadwinder Singh and another
Vs. State of Punjab and others decided on 24.05.2024. He has also relied
| attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
KAPIL
2024.07.01 17:29
CRWP-6123-2024 (O&M) 2
upon the order dated 02.11.2021 passed by the Coordinate Bench of this
Court in CRWP-10411-2021 titled as Amandeep Kaur and another Vs.
State of Punjab and others as per which in a case where one of the
petitioner was married and was living in with another person, other than the
spouse, this Court had granted protection to the petitioners. He has further
submitted that the petitioners had presented a representation dated
02.06.2024 (Annexure P5) to respondent No.2 and would be satisfied in case
respondent No.2 is directed to look into the said representation and after
considering the threat perception to the petitioners to take appropriate action.
4. Notice of motion to respondents No.1 to 3 only.
5. At the asking of the Court, Mr. Anmol Malik, DAG, Haryana
accepts notice on behalf of the respondents No.1 to 3-State and has stated
that he has no objection in case respondent No.2 is directed to look into the
representation of the petitioners on the aspect of threat perception and to
take appropriate action. Counsel for the petitioners is directed to supply a
copy of the complete paper book to the learned State counsel.
6. Heard.
7. With respect to the aspect of the petitioners not being divorced,
it is relevant to refer to a judgment of Division Bench dated of this Court
dated 03.09.2021 passed in LPA-769-2021 titled as Ishrat Bano and
another Vs. State of Punjab and others. Ishrat Bano (petitioner therein)
had filed CRWP-7903-2021 which was dismissed by the learned Single
Judge of this Court primarily on the ground that the divorce documents
presented by the petitioners were one sided documents and thus, it appeared
that the divorce was not legal. The mater was taken up in appeal and the
| attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
CRWP-6123-2024 (O&M) 3
Division Bench of this Court vide judgment dated 03.09.2021 passed in
LPA-769-2021 titled as Ishrat Bano and another Vs. State of Punjab and
others has held as under:-
8.
"The aspect which we are considering and dealing with is
with regard to the threat to the life and liberty to the appellants
as has been asserted by them. No doubt, in case a criminal case
is registered against any of the parties, the law should take its
own course, however, the life and liberty of any person who has
approached the Court with such a grievance need to be taken
care of and the protection be provided as permissible in law. No
person can be permitted or allowed to take law in his hands and
therefore, keeping in view the said aspect, we dispose of the
present appeal by observing that the Senior Superintendent of
Police, Maler Kotla, shall take into consideration the
representation dated 17.08.2021 (Annexure P-5) submitted by
the appellants and if some substance is found therein, take
appropriate steps in accordance with law to ensure that the life
and liberty is not jeopardized of the appellants at the hands of
the private respondents. This direction shall not be construed in
any manner to restrain the official respondents to proceed
against the appellants in case there is some criminal case
registered against them. The law shall take its own course and it
shall be open to the authorities/investigating agency to proceed
against the appellants, if required in law and in accordance
thereto."
Thus, the Division Bench after considering the aspect of the
protection of the life and liberty and without getting into the issue as to
whether the relationship between the parties are legal or not, even in spite of
the fact that there was a criminal case registered against the parties,
however, granted them protection.
KAPIL
2024.07.01 17:29
| attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
CRWP-6123-2024 (O&M) 4
9. In view of the same, it goes without saying that the protection
of life and liberty is a fundamental right emanating out of Article 21 of the
Constitution of India and the scope of the present petition is only regarding
protection of life and liberty of the petitioners.
10. Keeping in view the abovesaid facts and circumstances and
without commenting upon the legality of the relationship between the
petitioners or expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court
deems it appropriate to dispose of the present petition with a direction to
respondent no.2 to consider the representation dated 18.06.2024 (Annexure
P3) and to assess the threat perception to the petitioners and after
considering the same to take appropriate action in accordance with law.
11. Accordingly, the petition stands disposed of with abovesaid
directions. It is, however, clarified that this order shall not debar the State
and/or any person aggrieved from proceeding against the petitioners for
violation of any law or if they are involved in any other case.
(KIRTI SINGH)
JUDGE
01.07.2024
Kapil
Whether speaking / reasoned Yes/No
Whether Reportable Yes/No
KAPIL
2024.07.01 17:29
| attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
