IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-30627 of 2009 (O&M) Date of Decision: October 30, 2009 Sarita and another … Petitioners Versus State of Haryana and others … Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.D. ANAND Present : Ms. Gurmeet Gill, Advocate, for the petitioners. ***** S.D. Anand, J. Crl. Misc. No.55371 of 2009 Allowed, as prayed for. Crl. Misc. No.M-30627 of 2009 The learned counsel states that she would be content and interests of justice would be served if life and liberty of the petitioners is ordered to be protected. Notice of motion. On the asking of the Court, Mrs. Neena Madan, Additional Advocate General, Haryana accepts notice on behalf of the State. The petition is disposed of with a direction that respondent No.2 – Senior Superintendent of Police, Sonepat and respondent No.3 S.H.O., P.S. Civil Lines, Sonepat 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. Copy of the order be given to the learned State counsel under the signatures of the Special Secretary of this Court. October 30, 2009 ( S.D. Anand ) vinod Judge