IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Criminal Miscellaneous No. M-7920 of 2010 Date of Decision: April 21, 2010 Sumitra Devi & Another .....PETITIONER(S) VERSUS State of Haryana & Others .....RESPONDENT(S) . . . CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: - Mr. Jainainder Saini, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. Tarun Aggarwal, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Haryana, for respondent Nos.1 to 3. Mr. P.K. Chugh, Advocate. . . . AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral) It seems that petitioner No.1 is a widow having two children aged 10 years and 7 years. She got married to Suresh Goyal (petitioner No.2). Since a widow got married, the private respondents who are the family members of her earlier husband (Balwan), were agitated and threatened the petitioners with dire consequences. Vide Order dated 17.3.2010, Senior Crl. Misc. No. M-7920 of 2010 [2] Superintendent of Police, Hisar was directed to ensure protection of the petitioners. Learned counsel for the respondent- State has informed the Court that protection has been given to the petitioners. Learned counsel for the private respondents states that respondent Nos.4 to 11 have accepted the marriage of Sumitra Devi with Suresh Goyal, and the said respondents shall not cause any harm to the petitioners. In view of the above, the petition is disposed of with direction to the Senior Superintendent of Police, Hisar, to ensure protection of the petitioners. The said officer may consider to summon respondent Nos.4 to 16 for counselling so as to ensure that no harm is caused to the petitioners, and the respondents are made aware that the police authorities are seized of the threat to the petitioners from the respondents. (AJAI LAMBA) April 21, 2010 JUDGE avin 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?