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
7 paragraphs · 138 wordsVipin Sanghi, CJ
None appears for the petitioners, when the matter is called out.
The petitioners have preferred the present writ petition to seek a direction to the State to provide them protection from respondent no.3, who is the brother of petitioner no.1, on the ground that respondent no.3 is not happy with marriage of the petitioners. On 10.02.2023, this Court had granted protection to the petitioners.
Mr. Virk states that said order has been implemented and the petitioners are living peacefully.
We dispose of this writ petition is the aforesaid light.
The State shall continue to make an assessment of the threat perceived by the petitioners from respondent no.3 and to provide adequate protection to them for their safety as is considered necessary.
Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of.