← Library
High Court of DelhiW.P.(CRL)/1973/2019

Gunja Kumari & ANR. v. State & ORS.

2019-11-06Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Vibhu Bakhru2 pages

$~35 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(CRL) 1973/2019 GUNJA KUMARI & ANR.

..... Petitioners Through:

Ms Priya Sharma and Mr Prathvi Raj Chauhan, Advocates.

versus STATE & ORS.

..... Respondents Through:

Mr Tanuj Bhadana, Advocate for Mr Avi Singh, ASC for State with SI Jagjeewan, PS Badarpur.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

O R D E R

% 06.11.2019 1.

The petitioners have filed the present petition, inter alia, praying that the directions be issued to respondent nos.5 to 7 to not interfere with their married life.

2.

The petitioners state that they have married against the wishes of the family members of petitioner no.1. They are apprehensive of their safety from the family members of petitioner no.1 (in particular respondent nos.5 to 7).

3.

Although notices have been served to respondent no.5 to 7 but none appears for them.

4.

On 22.07.2019, this Court had directed SHO PS Badarpur to ensure that the petitioners are protected through beat staff and to take action in case of any specific complaint is made.

A status report has since been filed,

which indicates that on verification it is found that petitioner no.1 was a minor (aged 17 years and 10 months old) at the time of marriage, that is, on 14.05.2019.

Petitioner no.2 is stated to be younger and on verification it is found that he was 17 years 1 month old at the time of marriage on 14.05.2019.

Although petitioner no.1 has turned major, petitioner no.2 continues to be a minor.

5.

In view of the above, the police authorities are not precluded from taking any steps as necessary in accordance with law. However, insofar as the present petition is concerned, notwithstanding that petitioner no.2 is minor; the petitioners, are nonetheless, entitled to protection against any harm.

In view of the above, the orders passed on 22.07.2019 are made absolute and the concerned SHO is directed to ensure that the petitioners are provided such protection as he considers necessary. 6.

It is clarified that nothing stated in this order should be read as an expression of opinion by this Court as to the validity of the marriage of the petitioners.

7.

The petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. VIBHU BAKHRU, J NOVEMBER 06, 2019 MK