Misha and Anr. Vs State of Haryana and Ors. — Writ and Judicial Review | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

Misha and Anr. Vs State of Haryana and Ors. — Writ and Judicial Review | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Direction to respondent No.2-Superintendent of Police, District Faridabad, to decide the petitioners' representation (Annexure P-5) and grant them protection if any threat to their life and liberty is perceived; the order grants no immunity from legal action and expresses no opinion on the validity of the live-in-relationship.

Issue for consideration

Whether respondents No.1 to 3 (State) should be directed to protect the lives and personal liberty of the petitioners. +1 more

Court's answer

Without entering upon an exercise to evaluate the evidentiary value of the documents placed on the file, the petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2-Superintendent of Police, District Faridabad, to decide the petitioners' representation (Annexure P-5).

Ratio / Principle

Protection is to be granted to the petitioners if any threat to their life and liberty is perceived.

Key takeaways

The order shall not be taken to grant the petitioners immunity from legal action for violation of law, if any, committed by them.ratio¶21
The order expresses no opinion whatsoever on the validity of the petitioners' live-in-relationship; that question is expressly left open.obiter¶21

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Protection writ petition (CRWP-389-2025) under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India read with Article 21, filed by two majors living together against the wishes of respondents No.4 to 9; petitioner No.1 unmarried, petitioner No.2 earlier married with a mutual divorce petition pending before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Faridabad (first motion recorded 10.12.2024; second motion listed for 08.07.2025). Without evaluating the evidentiary value of the documents on file, the High Court (Rajesh Bhardwaj, J., orally, decision dated January 16, 2025) disposed of the petition, directing respondent No.2-Superintendent of Police, District Faridabad, to decide the petitioners' representation dated 08.01.2025 (Annexure P-5) and grant them protection if any threat to their life and liberty is perceived. The Court clarified that the order confers no immunity from legal action for violation of law and expressed no opinion on the validity of the live-in-relationship.

CRWP-389-2025

-1-

109

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CRWP-389-2025 Date of Decision: January 16, 2025

Misha and another

......Petitioners

Versus State of Haryana and others

......Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ

Present: Mr.S.K.Rana, Advocate for the petitioners.

RAJESH BHARDWAJ, J.(ORAL)

Present petition has been filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India read with Article 21 of Constitution of India for issuance of direction to respondents No.1 to 3 to protect the lives and personal liberty of the petitioners and also directing respondents No.4 to 9 not to interfere in the personal lives and liberty of the petitioners and further directing respondents No.1 to 3 not to allow/let respondents No.4 to 9 or anybody else to interfere with the liberty and lives of the petitioners or to harass them in any manner against their wishes.

Learned counsel for the petitioners states that petitioner No.1 is unmarried whereas petitioner No.2 though earlier married but he has already filed mutual divorce petition and proceedings in the same are pending before learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Faridabad, in which first motion statement has already been recorded on 10.12.2024 and the case

is now pending for 08.07.2025 for recording of second motion statement.

MEENU 2025.01.17 12:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRWP-389-2025 -2-

He submits that both the petitioners are major and are living together against the wishes of respondents No.4 to 9 and have sought protection to their life and liberty. They apprehend danger from respondents No.4 to 9. The petitioners have submitted a representation, dated 08.01.2025 (Annexure P- 5) to respondent No.2.

Notice of motion to respondents no.1 to 3-State only.

On the asking of the Court, Mr.Sumit Jain, Additional Advocate General, Haryana, who is present in Court, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents/State.

Without entering upon an exercise to evaluate the evidentiary value of the documents placed on the file, I dispose of the petition with a direction to respondent No.2-Superintendent of Police, District Faridabad, to decide the representation (Annexure P-5) of the petitioners and grant them protection, if any threat to their life and liberty is perceived. It is clarified that this order shall not be taken to grant immunity to the petitioners from legal action for violation of law, if any, committed by them. This order would not be understood having expressed any opinion whatsoever by this Court on the validity of their live-in-relationship.

January 16, 2025 ( RAJESH BHARDWAJ ) meenuss JUDGE 1. Whether speaking/reasoned ? Yes/No 2. Whether reportable ? Yes/No

MEENU 2025.01.17 12:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document