IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No. M-36628 of 2009 (O&M) Date of Decision: December 23, 2009 Rupa and another … Petitioners Versus State of Haryana and others … Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.D. ANAND. Present : Mr. Amandeep Singh, Advocate, for Mr. Balkar Singh, Advocate, for the petitioners. S.D. Anand, J.(Oral) Crl. Misc. No. 65923 of 2009 Allowed, as prayed for. Crl. Misc. No. M-36628 of 2009 Notice of motion. On the asking of the Court, Mrs. Neena Madan, Addl. Advocate Advocate General, Haryana, accepts notice on behalf of the State. The respondent Nos. 2 to 4 (Superintendent of Police, Rohtak, Senior Superintendent of Police, Chandigarh and S.H.O., Police Station, City Rohtak, District Rohtak, respectively) shall ensure that the petitioners shall have the similar constitutional protection which is available to all the citizens of the country under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The reiteration of that obvious constitutional guarantee would not be inferred to be an expression of opinion on the merits of the averments in the course of the petition qua the factum/validity of their matrimonial alliance. A copy of the order be given to the learned State counsel under the signatures of Special Secretary. Disposed of accordingly. December 23, 2009 ( S.D. Anand ) vkd Judge Crl. Misc. No. M-32938 of 2009 2