Sandeep Kumar And Another vs State Of Haryana And Others

Anoop Chitkara, J

Fearing for their lives and liberty at the hands of the private respondents, the pe oners have come up before this Court seeking protec on through the State, by invoking their fundamental rights of life guaranteed under Article 21 of the Cons tu on of India.

No ces served upon the official respondents through the State's counsel. Given the nature of the order, this Court proposes to pass, neither the response of official respondents is required nor exists any requirement to issue no ces to the private respondents.

As per memo of par es, pe oner No. 1 is stated to be major. However, pe oner No. 2 (Name withheld) is a minor girl.

If the allega ons 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 protec on to the pe oners for one week from today. However, if the pe oner No.1 no longer require the protec on, then it may be discon nued even before the expiry of one week. A er that, the concerned officers shall extend the protec on on day-to-day analysis of the ground reali es or upon the oral or wri en request of the pe oner No.1.

This protec on is subject to the stringent condi on that from the me such protec on is given, pe oner No. 1 shall not go outside the boundaries of the place of their residence, except for medical necessi es, to buy household necessi es, and bereavements in the families of the persons who are close to them. However, pe oner(s) shall be at liberty to shi the residence(s) and if the new place falls within the district, then the protec on shall be extended to such place. This restric on saves pe oner no.1 from apprehended risk and ensures that the protec on is not flaunted.

Learned counsel for the pe oners to direct the pe oners to a end the phone call(s) of the Inves gator. As far as the pe oner No. 2 is concerned, being a minor girl as soon as the Inves gator contacts her, he shall produce her to the nearest Judicial Magistrate and in case the me is not suitable immediately before a Child Protec on Home and a er that produce her before the concerned Judicial Magistrate. The concerned Judicial Magistrate shall interact with her and it is the concerned Magistrate's discre on whether to record her statement under Sec on 164 Cr.P.C or to proceed without that.

Learned Judicial Magistrate will either send the minor to Child Protec on Home and to her parents as per the result of the interac on with her. The iden ty of the place where pe oners are staying shall not be revealed to the private respondents.

It is made clear that the minor pe oner’s custody shall NOT be handed over the adult pe oner. It is clarified that there is no adjudica on on merits. It is also clarified that this order is not a blanket bail in any FIR for the pe oners. It is further clarified that this order shall not come in the way if the interroga on of pe oner No.1 is required in any cognizable case. It shall also be open for pe oner No.1 to approach this Court again in case of any fresh threat percep on.

This order shall eclipse a er fi een days from today.

There would be no need for a cer fied copy of this order, and any Advocate for the Pe oners and State can download this order and other relevant par culars from the official web page of this court and a est it to be a true copy. The concerned officer can also verify its authen city and may download and use the downloaded copy for immediate use.

Petition is allowed to the extent men oned above. All pending applica ons, if any, stand disposed.