Foziya and Another Vs State of Haryana and Others

Present Mr. Hardyal Singh Batth, Advo c ate, for the appellants. Mr. Bhupender Singh, Addition a l Advocate General, Haryana, for respondent nos. 1 to 3.

¶11

ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA, J.

¶12

Appellants have preferred thi s appeal challenging an orde r passed by t h e learned Single Judge on 02. 0 5.2025 in CRWP No. 4086 o f 2025.

¶13

The appellants contend that the y are major and have solemnize d the marriage. They further alleged that there is threat to their life and libert y from private respondents 4 to 6. Prayer acc o rdingly was made to direct th e State author i ties to protect the life and lib e rty of the appellants. The wri t petition has been dismissed by the learned Single Judge after noticing tha t both the appellants are residents of District Rampur in Uttar Pradesh. The y have been staying at Panchkula in Haryana for the last two weeks. Learne d Single Judg e , therefore, dismissed the writ petition on the ground that n o cause of action has arisen to the appellants w ithin the territorial jurisdictio n of this Cou r t since they are not residents o f the State of Haryana. It ha s

¶14

VARINDER SINGH 2025.07.30 10:35 I attest to the accuracy and authencity of this order/judgment

¶15

LPA No.1387 of 2025 - 2 -

¶16

further bee n observed that the appella n ts have not approached th e jurisdictiona l court for necessary relief.

¶17

This appeal is filed contending that the appellants are presentl y residing in t h e State of Haryana and cause of action has arisen to them t o approach thi s Court. 4. Learned counsel for the respon d ent State, however, submits tha t no part of c a use of action has arisen to the appellants before this Court t o maintain the present writ petition.

¶18

Learned counsel for the appell a nts has invited our attention t o paras 3, 6, 7 and 8 to submit that cause of a c tion has arisen to the appellant s to approach t his Court.

¶19

We have heard learned counse l for the parties and perused th e material on r ecord.

¶20

It is undisputed that both the ap p ellants are residents of State o f Uttar Pradesh. They claim to have solemn i zed marriage on 20.04.2025 a t Panchkula. T hey further alleged that they a r e residing at Panchkula for th e last two we e ks. Though a vague assertion w ith regard to pursuit threat t o them is ma d e in the writ petition but we a re not much impressed by th e narration of f acts which allegedly has given c ause for filing the writ petition . We find substance in the view taken by th e learned Single Judge that the y being reside n ts of District Rampur in Uttar P radesh there is no occasion fo r this Court to pass a protection order. The w r it petition is otherwise silent a s to when an d how threats were extended t o the appellants in the State o f Haryana. In such circumstances, we are n o t inclined to interfere with th e judgment o f the learned Single Judge. Ho w ever, it is provided that if th e

¶21

VARINDER SINGH 2025.07.30 10:35 I attest to the accuracy and authencity of this order/judgment

¶22

LPA No.1387 of 2025 - 3 -

¶23

appellants receive any threat in the State of H aryana, they shall be at libert y to approach s econd respondent along with r e quisite details who shall ensur e that appropr i ate action as is warranted in la w is taken to protect the life an d liberty of th e appellants.

¶24