Court granted constitutional protection under Article 21 to petitioners against their mother-in-law without commenting on the merits of their matrimonial alliance.
Direction to SP and SHO to ensure petitioners get constitutional protection under Article 21.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Crl. Misc. No. M-24010 of 2009 (O&M) Date of Decision: November 13, 2009
Sonal Angi and another … Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and others … Respondents
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.D. ANAND
Present : None for the petitioners.
Mr. Abhishek Chautala, AAG, Punjab.
S.D. Anand, J .
The petition is disposed of with a direction that respondent No.2 – Superintendent of Police, Barnal and respondent No.3 – SHO, P.S. City, Barnala shall ensure that the petitioners shall have the similar constitutional protection which is available to all the citizens of the country under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The reiteration of that obvious constitutional guarantee would not be inferred to be an expression of opinion on the merits of the averments in the course of the petition qua the factum/validity of their matrimonial alliance.
Disposed of accordingly.
Copy of the order be given to the learned State counsel under the signatures of the Special Secretary of this Court.
November 13, 2009 ( S.D. Anand ) vinod* Judge
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Sonal Angi and another
State of Punjab
Superintendent of Police, Barnal
SHO, P.S. City, Barnala
S.D. ANAND
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
