AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Anoop Chitkara, J
Fearing for their lives and liberty at the hands of the private respondents, the petitioners, 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.
Bar is abstaining from work. However, respondent No. 4-Sita Ram i.e father of petitioner No. 2, respondent No. 5-Kamlesh i.e. mother of petitioner No. 2 and respondent No. 10-Abhimanyu i.e. cousin of petitioner No. 2 (name withheld) are present in the Court. They have handed over photocopies of mark sheet of 10th class and Aadhar Card, which are taken on record. As per which, the date of birth of petitioner No. 2 is 25.12.2006.
As per memo of parties, petitioner No. 1 is major. But as per photocopies of mark sheet of 10th class and Aadhar Card, petitioner No. 2 (Name withheld) is a minor girl.
If the allegations of apprehension of threat to their lives turn out to be true, it might lead to an irreversible loss. Thus, in the facts and circumstances peculiar to this case, it shall be appropriate that the concerned Superintendent of Police, SHO, or any officer to whom such powers have been delegated or have been authorized in this regard, provide appropriate protection to the petitioners for one week from today. However, if the petitioner No.1 no longer require the protection, then it may be discontinued even before the expiry of one week. After that, the concerned officers shall extend the protection on day-to-day analysis of the ground realities or upon the oral or written request of the petitioner No.1.
This protection is subject to the stringent condition that from the time such protection is given, petitioner No. 1 shall not go outside the boundaries of the place of their residence, except for medical necessities, to buy household necessities, and bereavements in the families of the persons who are close to them. This restriction saves petitioner No.1 from apprehended risk and ensures that the protection is not flaunted.
Petitioners to attend the phone call of the Investigator. As far as the petitioner No.2 is concerned, being a minor girl as soon as the Investigator contacts her, he shall produce her to the nearest Judicial Magistrate immediately and in case the time is not suitable immediately before a Child Protection Home and after that produce her before the concerned Judicial Magistrate. The concerned Judicial Magistrate shall interact with her and it is the concerned Magistrate's discretion whether to record her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C or to proceed without that.
Learned Judicial Magistrate will either send the petitioner No. 2 to Child Protection Home and to her parents as per the result of the interaction with her. The identity of the place where petitioners are staying shall not be revealed to the private respondents.
It is clarified that there is no adjudication on merits. It is also clarified that this order is not a blanket bail in any FIR for the petitioners. It is further clarified that this order shall not come in the way if the interrogation of petitioner No.1 is required in any cognizable case. It shall also be open for petitioner No.1 to approach this Court again in case of any fresh threat perception.
This order shall eclipse after thirty days from today.
There would be no need for a certified copy of this order, and any Advocate for the Petitioner and State can download this order and other relevant particulars from the official web page of this court and attest it to be a true copy. The concerned officer can also verify its authenticity and may download and use the downloaded copy for immediate use.
Petition is allowed to the extent mentioned above. All pending applications, if any, stand disposed.