Pet it ioners v. St at e of Ut t arakhand ot hers

Ms. Sukhwani Singh, learned counsel. Counsel for St at e : Mr. J.S. Virk, learned DAG. JUD GM EN T : ( p e r H ON ’ BLE M R. A SH I SH N A I TH A N I , J) The present pet it ion has been filed under Art icle 226 of t he Const it ut ion of I ndia, seeking prot ect ion and securit y for t he pet it ioners, who have been subj ect ed t o repeat ed harassm ent , t hreat s, and int im idat ion by privat e respondent s. The pet it ioners also seek relief against any coercive act ion or inact ion by t he police aut horit ies addressing t heir grievances.

2. The brief fact s leading t o t he filing of t his writ pet it ion are t hat pet it ioner no. 1, Sm t . Rinu, aged about 35 years, pet it ioner no. 2, Shri Jagveer Singh, aged about 45 years, and t heir m inor children, pet it ioners no. 3 and 4, have been facing severe t hreat s from respondent nos. 4 t o 11, who are t heir close relat ives and fellow resident s of Akodha Kalan, Laksar, Dist rict Haridwar.

3. The disput e arises from an FI R lodged on

05.11.2022 as Case Crim e No. 1044 of 2022 under Sect ions 302 and 120- B of t he I ndian Penal Code, 1860, against pet it ioner no. 2, pet it ioner no. 3, and one Raj neesh. Aft er due invest igat ion, t he charge sheet was filed, excluding t he nam e of pet it ioner no. 2, w hile pet it ioner no. 3, being a m inor, was sent t o a j uvenile hom e and lat er released on bail. The t rial against him is st ill pending before t he Juvenile Just ice Board.

4. Since t he regist rat ion of t he FI R, t he pet it ioners have been subj ect ed t o ongoing act s of int im idat ion, assault , and harassm ent by t he privat e respondent s, who have prevent ed t hem from ent ering t heir hom e and village. Several com plaint s w ere m ade t o t he police aut horit ies on m ult iple dat es, request ing prot ect ion and legal act ion. Despit e t hese com plaint s, no effect ive m easures have been t aken by t he aut horit ies.

5. I t is cont ended t hat t he respondent s have also been int erfering w it h t he pet it ioners' agricult ural land and livelihood, leading t o financial dist ress. Several incident s of physical assault , dam age t o propert y, and verbal abuse have been report ed, yet no FI R has been lodged against t he privat e respondent s.

6. The learned counsel for t he pet it ioners subm it s t hat t he pet it ioners are unable t o exercise t heir fundam ent al right s under Art icle 21 of t he Const it ut ion of I ndia due t o t he const ant t hreat s and t he inact ion of t he police.

7. The Hon'ble Suprem e court , in Fr a n ci s Co r a l i e M u l l i n v . A d m i n i st r a t o r , Un i o n Te r r i t o r y o f D e l h i [ ( 1 9 8 1 ) 1 SCC 6 0 8 ] , t he Hon’ble Suprem e Court em phasized t hat t he right t o life includes t he right t o live w it h hum an dignit y and encom passes all elem ent s necessary for a dignified exist ence. The Court held t hat any act t hat offends hum an dignit y const it ut es a violat ion of Art icle 21 of t he Const it ut ion of I ndia.

8. Sim ilarly, in Ol g a Te l l i s v . Bo m b a y M u n i ci p a l Co r p o r a t i o n [ ( 1 9 8 5 ) 3 SCC 5 4 5 ] , t he Suprem e Court recognized t hat t he right t o livelihood is an int egral part of t he right t o life under Art icle 21. The Court held t hat depriving a person of t heir livelihood am ount s t o depriving t hem of it self, reinforcing t he broad and inclusive int erpret at ion of t he right t o life and dignit y.

9. Having considered t he subm issions m ade by t he learned counsel for t he part ies and aft er perusal of t he record, t his Court t hat t he failure of t he police aut horit ies t o t ake appropriat e act ion has result ed in a grave violat ion of t he pet it ioners' fundam ent al right s under Art icle 21 of t he Const it ut ion of I ndia. The pet it ioners have t he right t o live peacefully in t heir hom e wit hout fear of harm or unlawful int erference.

10. Accordingly, in view of t he fact s and circum st ances of t he case, t his writ pet it ion is disposed of. Court direct s SHO, police st at ion Laksar, Dist rict Haridwar t o t ake im m ediat e and effect ive st eps t o prov ide adequat e prot ect ion t o t he pet it ioners and ensure t hat t hey are able t o ent er and reside in t heir hom e safely. Upon expiry of 6 w eeks, t he SHO concerned is direct ed t o m ake fresh assessm ent s of t hreat percept ion of pet it ioners and t ake such st eps as are felt necessary. Respondent nos. 4 t o 11 are rest rained from int erfering in t he life and libert y of t he pet it ioners, causing harm t o t hem , or obst ruct ing t heir peaceful residence. G. N A REN DA R, C.J. A SH I SH N A I TH A N I , J. Dt : 25 t h February, 2025 NR/