CRWP-4086-2025 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 107 CRWP-4086-2025 Decided on: 02.05.2025 Foziya and another ......Petitioners Versus State of Haryana and others ......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH Present: Mr. H.S. Baath, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Kanwar Sanjiv Kumar, AAG, Haryana. (appeared on advance notice) **** SANJAY VASHISTH , J. 1. Petitioner No.1-Foziya, aged 20 years and petitioner No.2- Anis Ahmed, aged 29 years, have filed instant petition, for seeking protection of their life and liberty at the hands of private respondents No. 4 to 6 and for that purpose there is a prayer for issuance of direction to the official respondents. 2. As already noticed, both the petitioners are residents of their respective villages, situated within Tehsil Swar, District Rampur (U.P.). In view thereof, on 25.04.2025, the following order was passed, directing the learned State counsel to verify the place of residence of both the petitioners. RASHMI 2025.05.02 17:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRWP-4086-2025 2 “1. Present petition has been filed by the petitioners seeking issuance of direction to the official respondents to protect their life and liberty from the hands of private respondent Nos.4 to 6. 2. Notice of motion. 3. On advance notice, Mr. Kanwar Sanjiv Kumar, AAG, Haryana, puts an appearance on behalf of the respondent/State. 4. List again on 02.05.2025. 5. Learned State counsel is directed to verify the place of residence of both petitioners, whose original addresses, as per the memo of parties, are stated to be in the State of Uttar Pradesh. To be shown in the urgent list.” 3. Today, learned State counsel, on instructions from ASI Satish Kumar, submits that as per the verification conducted by the official respondents, the petitioners have been residing at the residence of their relatives for the past two weeks only. It appears that they have taken up such residence solely with the intent to file the present petition before this Court and thereby obtain a protection order It is further submitted by the learned State counsel that, as per the verification conducted, the actual and factual addresses of both the petitioners are the same as those mentioned in the memo of parties i.e., villages falling under Tehsil Swar, District Rampur (U.P.). 4. Taking note of the explanation submitted by the State and the manner in which the petitioners have attempted to procure a protection order without approaching the Court having jurisdiction over the area where they usually reside, this Court finds no justification to entertain the present petition. In such circumstances, issuance of directions for grant of protection, would not serve the intended purpose, RASHMI 2025.05.02 17:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRWP-4086-2025 3 particularly when it is evident that the petitioners are not usually residing in the State of Haryana. Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed (SANJAY VASHISTH) 02.05.2025 JUDGE rashmi Whether Speaking/Reasoned: YES/NO Whether Reportable: YES/NO RASHMI 2025.05.02 17:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document