DEEPAK SINGLA Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Through this petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India prayer has been made for directing respondents No.2 and 3 to protect the life and liberty of the petitioners at the hands of respondents No.4 and 5 as the petitioners are in live-in-relationship.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that petitioner No.1-Deepak Singla is already married with one Mamta. However, he is having matrimonial dispute with his wife-Mamta since 2014. He tried his level best to resolve the dispute and live with Mamta peacefully but no fruitful solution has occurred. Learned counsel further contends that both the petitioners are known to each other for the last so many years and petitioner No.1 is having dispute with his wife, therefore, both the petitioners have decided to live together. However, private respondents are against their relationship. Learned counsel further contends that petitioners are in a live-in-relationship with their own free will without any pressure. In support of her contentions learned counsel for the petitioners relied upon order passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP (Crl) No.4028 of2021 - Gurwinder Singh and another v. The State of Punjab and others dtd. 4/6/2021 and orders of this Court passed in Amandeep Kaur and another v. State of Punjab and others dated, 2022 (1) R.C.R.(Criminal) 90; CRWP-7717 of 2022 - Rinu and another v. State of Haryana and others dtd. 10/8/2022; CRWP-7451 of 2021 -Tamnna and another v. State of Punjab and others dtd. 9/8/2021; LPA-1678 of 2014 - Rajwinder Kaur and another v. State of Punjab and others dtd. 9/10/2014; LPA-769 of 2021 - Ishrat Bano and another v. State ofPunjab and others dtd. 3/9/2021; CRWP-4521 of 2021 - Pardeep Singh and another v. State of Haryana and others dtd. 18/5/2021 and CRWP-7753 of 2022 - Manpreet Kaur and another v. State ofPunjab and others dtd. 22/8/2022.

(3.) I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and perused the paperbook.