IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-26098 of 2009 Date of Decision: November 9, 2009 Sonali. … Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others. … Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.D. ANAND. Present: Mr. Gopal Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. S.S. Pattar, Sr. DAG, Haryana. Mr. P.R. Yadav, Advocate, for respondent No.4. S.D. Anand, J. (Oral) The learned State counsel states that the challan in the matter had already been filed on 03.09.2009. In the light thereof, the learned counsel for the petitioner states that he would be content if the life and liberty of the petitioner is ordered to be protected. He further states in the context of the averment in the course of petition that she apprehends danger Crl. Misc. No. M-26098 of 2009 to her life at the hands of the estranged husband who happens to be the police functionary. The petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent Nos. 2 and 3 (Superintendent of Police, Rewari and S.H.O. Police Station Dahina, District Rewari, respectively) that the petitioner shall have the similar constitutional protection which is available to all the citizens of the country under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. This order shall be noticed in the Roznamcha of the concerned Police Station. The SHO of the concerned police station, the Supervisory Officer of that area and the District Police Chief shall be responsible for ensuring that this order is complied with meticulously. The learned counsel, appearing on behalf of respondent No.4, states that he reserves liberty to contest the correctness of the averments in the appropriate forum. Disposed of accordingly. November 9, 2009 ( S.D. Anand ) vkd Judge 2