The right to life and liberty under Article 21 includes the right to choose a partner, and individuals in live-in relationships are entitled to protection from threats.

JUDGMENT

Mr. Jasjit Singh Bedi, J. (Oral)

The present Criminal Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of directions to respondent Nos. 2 to 3 to protect the life and liberty of the petitioners.

2. The petitioner no.1 is stated to have been born on 05.12.2000 and for this purpose, reference has been made to the Aadhaar card (Annexure P-1). The petitioner no.2 is stated to have been born on 11.09.1992 and for the said purpose, reference has been made to the Aadhaar card (Annexure P-2). It is stated that the petitioners are in a "Live in Relationship". Petitioner No.1 had solemnized marriage with respondent No.4-Sunil Kumar and out of the said wedlock they have two children. Petitioner No.2 is unmarried. And as such, the petitioner No.1 is in a 'live-in-relationship' with petitioner No.2.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has stated that a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in a judgment dated 18.05.2021 passed in CRWP-4521- 2021 titled as "Pardeep Singh and another v. State of Haryana and others" has granted protection in a case where the petitioners were living in a "Live in Relationship".

4. The learned counsel has further relied upon an order passed by a coordinate Bench of this Court dated 03.09.2021, passed in CRWP-7874- 2021 titled as "Paramjit Kaur and another v. State of Punjab and others" as per which although the divorce petition filed by petitioner no.2 therein was dismissed, yet this Court had granted protection to the petitioners.

5. The learned Counsel for the petitioners has also relied upon an order passed by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court dated 02.11.2021 passed in CRWP-10411-2021 Amandeep Kaur & Anr. v. State of Punjab & Ors. as per which in a case where one of the parties was married and was living in with another person other than her husband, this Court had granted protection to the petitioners therein.

6. The learned counsel has further submitted that the petitioners have sent a representation dated 29.06.2024 (Annexure P-3) to respondent no.2 and they would be satisfied in case respondent no.2 is directed to look into the said representation and after considering the threat perception to the petitioners, take appropriate action in accordance with law.

7. Notice of motion to respondents Nos.1 to 3 only.

8. On advance notice, Mr. Neeraj Sheoran, DAG, Haryana appears and accepts notice on behalf of respondents Nos.1 to 3 and has stated that he has no objection in case respondent no.2 is directed to look into the representation of the petitioners on the aspect of threat perception and to take appropriate action, in accordance with law.

9. This Court has heard learned counsel for the parties.

10. In Pardeep Singh's (supra), a co-ordinate Bench of this Court has held as under:-

" The Constitution of India is the Supreme Law of the land. Right to life and liberty is enshrined therein and is treated as a basic feature. The said right includes the right of an individual to full development of his/her potential in accordance with his/her choice and wish and for such purpose, he/she is entitled to choose a partner of his/her choice. The individual also has the right to formalize the relationship with the partner through marriage or to adopt the non-formal approach of a live-in-relationship. The concept of live-in-relationships has crept into our society from western nations and initially, found acceptance in the metropolitan cities, probably because, individuals felt that formalization of a relationship through marriage was not necessary for complete fulfilment. Education played a great role in development of this concept. Slowly, the concept has percolated into small towns and villages also as is evident from this petition. This shows that social acceptance for live-in-relationships is on the increase. In law, such a relationship is not prohibited nor does it amount to commission of any offence and thus, in my considered view such persons are entitled to equal pr