[Live-in relation] P&H High Court dismisses protection plea "filed just to obtain seal of Court"

The Punjab and Haryana High Court recently dismissed a plea for protection by a couple who were in a live-in relationship, while still married to others, upon finding the couple's claims of facing threats from undisclosed persons to be unbelievable..Justice Arvind Singh Sangwan opined that the petition had been filed "just to obtain a seal of this Court on their so-called live-in- relationship."."On the face of it, both the petitioners, without seeking divorce from their respective spouses ... 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 Court observed further. .The petitioners told the Court that they have been sharing a romantic relationship with each other for many years, despite being married to other people. It was further submited that they have been living together for the last one month, much to the annoyance of their respective spouses..As such, a petition was filed seeking directions from the Court to protect the couple against the alleged threats they faced. .A representation made on the issue to the Superintendent of Police, Kaithal was also referred to, wherein the petitioners stated that they apprehend harm from “aforementioned persons.” However, the representation, as well as the petition, did not clarify who these "aforementioned persons" were, the Court found. ."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 ... On the face of it, the representation (Annexure P-4) appears to be a fake document as no receipt or diary number of the office of Superintendent of Police, Kaithal is given or attached", the Court said. .The Court also noted that the woman petitioner had filed for divorce from her husband citing desertion and neglect. Pertinently, the Judge found that the claims made in the divorce petition were in sharp contrast to the petition filed seeking protection. .In this backdrop, the judge concluded that there is no reason to believe that the petitioner’s life and liberty are under threat. As such, the court dismissed the petition..[Read Order]