Punjab-Haryana High Court
Jagjiwan Singh And Anr vs State Of Punjab And Ors on 26 December, 2024
Author: Meenakshi I. Mehta
Bench: Meenakshi I. Mehta
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:172298
114
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CRWP No.12576 of 2024
Date of Decision: 26.12.2024
Jagjiwan Singh & another
...Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab & others
...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA
Present:- Mr. Sarvesh Kumar Gupta, Advocate,
for the petitioners.
****
MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA, J. (ORAL)
By way of the instant petition, both the petitioners have sought
the indulgence of this Court for the issuance of a writ in the nature of
mandamus directing respondents No.1 to 3 to protect their lives and liberty as
they apprehend threat to the same at the hands of respondent No.4 because
they (petitioners) have solemnized their marriage against the wishes of the
said respondent. It has also been mentioned in this petition that a
representation (Annexure P-5) has already been moved to respondent No.2 in
this regard.
2. Notice of motion to respondents No.1 to 3 only.
3. Mr. Adhiraj Singh, learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab,
has appeared on behalf of respondents No.1 to 3 in this case in pursuance of
the copies of the present petition having been sent to the respondent-State in
advance and he accepts the notice on their behalf.
1 of 2
::: Downloaded on – 26-12-2024 22:34:06 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:172298
CRWP No.12576 of 2024 -2-
4. Heard.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners restricts his prayer to the
issuance of a direction to respondent No.2 to look into and take appropriate
action on the said representation of petitioner No.2, i.e. Annexure P-5.
6. Learned State counsel has no objection for the same.
7. Keeping in view the intent of the fundamental right as enshrined
in Article 21 of the Constitution of India which ensures the protection of life
and liberty to the citizens as well as the afore-discussed limited prayer as made
by learned counsel for the petitioners and without commenting or expressing
any opinion on the legality and validity of the marriage as stated to have been
solemnized between the petitioners, respondent No.2-Senior Superintendent of
Police, Tarn Taran, is, hereby, directed to look into the above-referred
representation (Annexure P-5) of petitioner No.2 and if it is found that the
petitioners genuinely deserve any protection, then to take appropriate action in
accordance with law.
8. This petition stands disposed of accordingly.
December 26, 2024 (MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA)
seema JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes
Whether Reportable: No
2 of 2
::: Downloaded on - 26-12-2024 22:34:06 :::
[ad_1]
Source link