SATNAM SINGH AND ANR v. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS
CRWP/3859/2025 · 2025-04-21
Rajesh Bhardwaj
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 46808 (PNJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 46808 (PNJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
CRWP-3859-2025 -1-
109 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRWP-3859-2025 Date of Decision: 21.04.2025 Satnam Singh and another ..... Petitioners Versus The State of Haryana and others .......Respondents
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ Present: Mr. Lakhwinder Singh Lakhanpal, Advocate, for the petitioners. Rajesh Bhardwaj, J. (ORAL)
1. The petitioners have filed the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of direction to respondents No.1 to 3 for protection of life and personal liberty of the petitioners from the hands of private respondents and their other companions.
2.
Learned counsel for the petitioners states that both the petitioners are major and have married against the wishes of respondents No.4 to 6. They apprehend danger from respondents No.4 to 6. Their marriage certificate evidencing their marriage is on record as Annexure P-3. The petitioners have submitted a representation dated 10.04.2025 (Annexure P-4) to respondent No.2.
3. Notice of motion to the official respondents only.
4. Mr. Sumit Jain, Addl. AG, Haryana accepts notice on behalf of the State. Ms. Simran, Advocate, accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.4.
5. Without entering upon an exercise to evaluate the evidentiary value of the documents placed on the file, I dispose of the petition with a direction to respondent no.2- the Superintendent of Police, Sirsa to decide SHARMILA DEVI 2025.04.22 11:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment PHHC
CRWP-3859-2025 -2-
the representation (Annexure P-4) of the petitioners and grant them protection, if any threat to their life and liberty is perceived.
6. It is clarified that this order shall not be taken to grant immunity to the petitioners from legal action for violation of law, if any, committed by them. This order would not be understood having expressed any opinion whatsoever by this Court on the validity of the marriage of the petitioners.
(RAJESH BHARDWAJ) 21.04.2025 JUDGE sharmila Whether Speaking/Reasoned : Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No SHARMILA DEVI 2025.04.22 11:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment PHHC