HARPREET KUMAR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Fearing for their lives and liberty at the hands of the private respondents, the petitioners who claim to be living in live-in relationship, despite the female being previously married, against the wishes of the private respondents, and such marriage in subsistence, have come up before this Court seeking protection through the State, by invoking their fundamental rights of life guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, seeking direction to the State to protect them.

(2.) Notices served upon the official respondents through the State's counsel. Given the nature of the order that this Court proposes to pass, neither the response of official respondents nor the issuance of notices to the private respondents is required.

(3.) The times are changing fast, even in those lands that were left behind and stuck with the old ethos and conservative social milieu. We are governed by the rule of law and follow the Constitutional dharma. In the ever-evolving society, evolving the law with it, the time is to shift perspective from didactics of the orthodox society, shackled with the strong strings of morality supported by religions to one that values an individual"s life above all. Every person in the territory of India has an inherent and indefeasible fundamental right to life flowing from Article 21 of India"s constitution and the State is duty bound to protect life.