AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
6 paragraphs · 208 wordsGurvinder Singh Gill, J
Petitioner No.1 – Anu Radha aged about 36 years, who is stated to be already married to respondent No.4 – Chankya Varagi, and petitioner No.2 – Naresh Kumar aged about 27 years, both of whom are in a ‘live-in’ relationship, seek issuance of a direction to the official respondents to protect their lives and liberty as they apprehend threat to the same at the hands of respondent Nos.4 to 6, who do not approve of their ‘live-in’ relationship.
Notice of motion.
Ms. Swati Batra, DAG, Punjab, upon whom an advance notice had already been served, has put in appearance on behalf of the respondent – State of Punjab and has informed that inquiries have already been made by the police and statements of both the petitioners were recorded, wherein they have stated that as of now they do not have any apprehension of threat to their lives and liberty.
Faced with the aforestated position, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that he may be permitted to withdraw the present petition with liberty to file afresh at a later stage in case need be.
In view of the aforesaid submission, the instant petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty aforesaid.