Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2025 DAILYLAW 49033 (PNJ)

REENA DEVI AND ANOTHER v. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

CRWP/4184/2025 · 2025-04-29

Sudeepti Sharma

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 CRWP-4184-2025 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 110 CRWP-4184-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision: April 29, 2025 Reena Devi and another ......Petitioners Vs. State of Punjab and others ......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA Present: Mr.Fariad Singh Virk, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Amit Shukla, AAG, Punjab. Mr. Rana Ghuman, Advocate for respondents No.4 to 9 ---- SUDEEPTI SHARMA J. (ORAL) The present writ petition under Article 226/227 of Constitution of India, is filed for issuance of direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents No.l to 3 to provide protection of life and liberty to the petitioners as they are in live-in-relationship and also directing respondent No.4 to 9 not to interfere in their personal lives and liberty nor to harass them. 2. Learned State counsel on instructions from ASI Vijay Kumar, has shown this Court the affidavits filed by petitioners No.1 and 2 wherein they have stated that as on date there is no threat perception to them from anybody nor there is any requirement of police protection. Sonia Arora 2025.05.02 11:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 2 CRWP-4184-2025 (O&M) 3. In view of the above and the affidavits given by the petitioners, since the petitioners are not apprehending any threat, therefore, the present writ petition is dismissed as having been rendered infructuous. 4. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. (SUDEEPTI SHARMA) JUDGE April 29, 2025 sonia arora Whether speaking/reasoned: Speaking Whether reportable: Yes / No Sonia Arora 2025.05.02 11:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document