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 1, Cited by 0]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Neetu @ Sahila And Anr vs State Of Haryana And Ors on 20 May, 2016

Author: Jaspal Singh

Bench: Jaspal Singh

CRM-M-17714 of 2016                                                  --1--


           IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                          AT CHANDIGARH

                                        CRM-M-17714 of 2016
                                        DECIDED ON: May 20, 2016

NEET @ SAHILA AND ANOTHER                             .....PETITIONERS


                                     VERSUS


STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS                                 .....RESPONDENTS

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASPAL SINGH

1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

Present:    Petitioners in person along with
            Mr. Vijay Kumar, Advocate.

            *****

JASPAL SINGH, J (ORAL)

This is a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for issuance of directions to respondents No.2 and 3 to protect the lives and liberty of the petitioners from the hands of respondents No.4 to 6.

2. Notice to respondents No. 1 to 3 only at this stage.

3. At the asking of Court, Ms. Neelam Kashyap, DAG, Haryana accepts notice on behalf of respondent-State of Haryana. Copy of the petition be supplied to learned State counsel during the course of day.

4. The present petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2- Superintendent of Police, Yamuna Nagar, Haryana to look into the grievances unfolded by the petitioners in their representation dated May 13, 2016 (Annexure P-4) and if respondent 1 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 21-05-2016 00:18:38 ::: CRM-M-17714 of 2016 --2--

No.2 finds that there is threat perception to the petitioners, he shall provide the necessary protection, if so required.

5. However, this order shall not be construed as a measure to treat the marriage of the petitioners valid or legal.

May 20, 2016                                              (JASPAL SINGH)
sonika                                                       JUDGE




                                     2 of 2


                  ::: Downloaded on - 21-05-2016 00:18:39 :::