Punjab-Haryana High Court
Monika Singh And Another vs State Of Haryana And Others on 26 December, 2024
Author: Meenakshi I. Mehta
Bench: Meenakshi I. Mehta
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:172303
115
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CRWP No.12577 of 2024
Date of Decision: 26.12.2024
Monika Singh and another
.....Petitioners.
Versus
State of Haryana and others
.....Respondents.
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA
*****
Present:- Mr. Tanveer Singh, Advocate
for the petitioners.
MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA, J. (Oral)
Both the petitioners have joined hands to prefer the instant
petition for seeking the issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus
directing respondents No.2 to 4 to protect their lives and liberty as they
apprehend threat to the same at the hands of respondents No.5 to 12 because
they (petitioners) have solemnized their marriage against the wishes of these
respondents. 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 4 only.
3. Ms. Ankita Ahuja, learned Assistant Advocate General,
Haryana, has appeared on behalf of respondents No.1 to 4 in this case in
pursuance of the copies of the present petition having been sent to the
respondent-State in advance and she accepts the notice on their behalf.
1 of 2
::: Downloaded on – 26-12-2024 22:35:08 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:172303
CRWP No.12577 of 2024 -2-
4. Heard.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners restricts his prayer to the
issuance of direction to respondent No.2 to look into and take appropriate
action on the said representation of the petitioners, 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-Superintendent of Police, District Kurukshetra, is, hereby,
directed to look into the above-referred representation (Annexure P-5) of the
petitioners and if it is found that the petitioners genuinely deserve any
protection, then to take appropriate action in accordance with law.
8. However, it is clarified that this order shall not be construed
to be a shield to the petitioners against any civil or criminal action/
proceedings already initiated or intended/contemplated to be initiated
against them by any competent authority/person on account of their afore-
said marriage and permissible under the relevant provisions of law.
9. The petition in hand stands disposed of accordingly.
(MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA)
December 26, 2024 JUDGE
Yag Dutt
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes
Whether Reportable: No
2 of 2
::: Downloaded on - 26-12-2024 22:35:08 :::