Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Kajal And Another vs State Of Haryana And Others on 16 December, 2024

Author: Anupinder Singh Grewal

Bench: Anupinder Singh Grewal

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

         154                                      LPA-3221-2024
                                                           2024
                                                  DATE OF DECISION: 16.12.2024

         KAJAL AND ANOTHER                                                  ... Petitioner (s)
                         Versus
         STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS                                        ... Respondent(s)

         CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL
                HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE LAPITA BANERJI

         Present:              Mr. S.A. Chaudhary,, Advocate for the petitioner
                                                                     petitioner(s).

         ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL, J. (ORAL)

The petitioners have challenged the order dated 03 03.12.2024 passed in CRWP No.11637 of 2024 titled as 'Kajal and another Vs. State of Haryana and others' whereby the petition seeking direction to protect their life and liberty has been dismissed.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petition petitioner er No.1 is a permanent resident of Haryana and had placed pla ed on record copy of the adhaar card to this effect. Petitioner No.2 is a permanent resident of Uttar Pradesh but he is residing with petitioner No.1 in the State of Haryana in Panipat District. He further ther submits that both the petitioners are over 18 years of age.

Issue notice to the respondents.

At the asking of the Court, Mr. Anant Kataria, DAG, Haryana accepts notice on behalf of respondents No.1 to 3 and submits that petitioner No.2 was the resident esident of State of Uttar Pradesh, therefore, impugned order had rightly been passed.

Heard.

The petitioners are stated to be over 18 years of age, which is borne out from the copies of adhaar cards annexed at P- SWARNJIT SINGH

P-2 and P-3. Petitioner No.1 is a 2024.12.16 17:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document LPA-3221-2024 -2- permanent resident of Haryana as is reflected in her adhaar card. Petitioner No.2 may be a resident of Uttar Pradesh but both the petitioners are claiming protection of their life and liberty on the ground that they are residing together within the State of Haryana. The petitioners are stated to be over 18 years of age. They are apprehending threat to their life and liberty at the hands of the private respondents who are relatives of petitioner No.1 & 2. Article 21 of the Constitution of India guarantees protection of life and personal liberty. It is the duty of the State to protect the life and liberty of the petitioners. Consequently, the Letters Patent Appeal is allowed and the impugned order dated 03.12.2024 is set aside. Respondents No.1 & 2 shall look into the matter and take steps, if necessary, to protect the life and liberty of the petitioners.

(ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL) JUDGE (LAPITA BANERJI) JUDGE 16.12.2024 SwarnjitS Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes / No Whether reportable : Yes / No SWARNJIT SINGH 2024.12.16 17:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document