The Punjab and Haryana High Court has come down hard on a live-in couple who are still married to their estranged spouses and seeking police protection. The HC dismissed their plea observing that were living a lustful and adulterous life with each other without obtaining divorce.
The single-judge bench of Justice Arvind Singh Sangwan passed this order while hearing a Criminal Writ Petition filed by Kavita and another. The petition had been filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution seeking issuance of directions to officials respondents to protect the life and liberty of the petitioners at the hands of respondents as the petitioners are in live-in-relationship against the wishes of the private respondents.
The petitioner, Kavita, is aged about 35 years and is the legally wedded wife of Sunil Dutt i.e., respondent 4, whereas Angrez Singh, being petitioner 2, is 32 years old and is legally wedded husband of Lakhwinder Kaur being respondent 6 in the present petition. The petition said they are in love with each other for the past few years and have developed some understanding and liking towards each other. For the last one month, they are in a live-in-relationship and for this reason, the private respondents are annoyed with them.
It is further said that Kavita has filed a divorce petition but the divorce has not been granted so far. The bench observed, “A perusal of the petition would show that neither any date is given in the petition seeking divorce nor any date is given in the application seeking grant of interim maintenance. There is no case number mentioned on the said divorce petition.”
A perusal of the petition would further show that, it is stated that the husband of petitioner No. 1 has deserted her and neglected by causing mental and physical cruelty, Justice Sangwan said.
The averments made in para 9 and 3 of the petition are in sharp contrast to each other as in divorce petition, it is stated that husband of petitioner No. 1 has deserted and neglected her, whereas in para 3 of the petition, it is stated that both the petitioners are loving each other for the last many years.
The Court noted further, “In the application dated September 27, 2012, addressed to Superintendent of Police, Kaithal, it is again stated that both the petitioners are loving each other for the last so many years and are in a live-in-relationship for the last one month and they are having apprehensions at the hands of “aforementioned persons”, however, a perusal of this representation reveals that no such persons are referred to in the entire representation and nothing is stated as to from whom, the petitioners are apprehending threat. On the face of it, both the petitioners, without seeking divorce from their respective spouses, i.e. respondent No. 4 and 6, respectively, are living a lustful and adulterous life with each other and have relied upon a totally vague document i.e. representation, wherein it is nowhere stated that from whom, they are apprehending threat to their life and liberty.”
The bench remarked, “It is worth noticing here that in the absence of any allegation by not naming anyone in the representation, it cannot be presumed that both the petitioners have any apprehension from their own spouses and this petition has been filed just to obtain a seal of this Court on their so called live-in relationship.”
“The representation appears to be a fake document as no receipt or diary number of the office of Superintendent of Police, Kaithal is given or attached,” said the Court while dismissing the petition.