CRWP/12448/2023 of YASHIKA AND ANR Vs STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS on 22 December 2023

CRW P-12448-202127

2023:PHHC: 165336

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CRWP-12448-2023 (O & M)Date of decision: 22.12.2023

Yashika and apnr.Petitioners}

V/s

State of Haryana and ors......Respondents CORAM:HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDIPresent:Mr. Deep Singh, Advocate, for the petitioners.FS 2k JASJIT SINGH BEDI,J. (Oral)

The petitioners have approached this Court for issuance ofnecessary directions to respondents No.2 and 3 for protecting their lives andliberties which according to them are at stake because they are in alive-in-relationship. Petitioner No.1-Yashika claims herself to be a major. Asaccording to the copy of the Aadhar Card (Annexure P-1), her exact date ofbirth is 12.09.2005 whereas petitioner No.2-Kapil Dev is a minor being theage of 17 years as according to a copy of Aadhar Card (Annexure P-2) hisdate of birth is 29.09. 2006.

The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that amarriage is not a must for providing security to a couple in a ‘live-in-relationship’ because protection qua life and liberty is sacrosanct andstands at the highest pedestal. He has also placed reliance upon orderspassed by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court in ‘Sarabjeet Kaur andanother versus State ofPunjab and others’in CRWP-102-2022 decided on07.01.2022 and ‘Goutam Kumar and another versus State ofPunjab and CRW P-12448-202127

2023:PHHC: 165336

others’in CRWP-8088-2021 decided on 26.08.2021 and ‘Bharhi andAnother versus State of U.T., Chandigarh & others, CRWP-9470-2020,decided on 19,11.2070-.

Notice of motion to respondents No. | to 3.)

On the asking of the Court, Mr. Ravish Kaushik, Addl.AG,Haryana, accepts notice on behalf of the official respondents. Since noorder prejudicial to the interest of the parties is being passed, therefore,there is no necessity of inviting any response.

At this stage, without expressing any opinion on the merits ofthe case, as well as on the age and nature of the relationship between thepetitioners, | deem it appropriate to direct respondent No. 2- Superintendentof Police, District Yamuna Nagar, to look into the matter and pass anappropriate order in the representation allegedly filed by the petitionersbefore him on 18.12.2023 (Annexure P-3). It would be appreciated ifnecessary orders are passed within one month from the date of receipt ofcopy of this order.

However, if the petitioners are found to have been involvedin any other case then this order shall not preclude the competent authorityfrom taking lawful action against the petitioners.

Disposed of.

( JASJIT SINGH BEDI)December 22, 2023JUDGEsukhpreet Whether speaking/reasonedWhether reportable : Yes/No: Yes/No