Shefali And Another v. State Of Haryana And Others

CRWP No. 67 of 2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRWP No. 67 of 2025 DATE OF DECISION :- 08.01.2025 Shefali and another

...Petitioners

Versus

State of Haryana and others

...Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Present:- Mr. Ajay Singh Pundir, Advocate for the petitioners. *** SUMEET GOEL , J.

(Oral) 1.

By way of present petition filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, petitioners are seeking issuance of directions to the official respondents to protect their life and liberty at the hands of respondent Nos. 4 to 14.

2.

Notice of motion to respondents Nos. 1 to 3 (i.e. official respondents).

3.

On the asking of the Court, Ms. Ankita Ahuja, AAG, Haryana accepts notice on behalf of the official respondents. 4.

As per the petitioners, they have married on 19.07.2024 against the wishes of respondent Nos. 4 to 14, who happen to be the family members/relative of the petitioners.

5.

Both the petitioners have claimed themselves to be major relying upon their Aadhar Cards indicating that date of birth of petitioner No.1-Shefali is 13.12.1997 and petitioner No.2-Rahul Sharma is 27.04.2002. PARVINDER SINGH 2025.01.08 17:30 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

CRWP No. 67 of 2025 6.

Without commenting on the legality and validity of the marriage as also the merits of contentions raised in the petition, I deem it appropriate to direct respondents No. 2 and 3 (concerned Superintendent of Police/SHO) to look into the representation dated 02.01.2025 (Annexure P4) stated to have been submitted by the petitioners & pass appropriate orders thereupon within two weeks from today.

7.

Keeping in view the fact that both the petitioners claim to have married against the wishes of their family(s), I direct that if possible, respondents No. 2 and 3 (concerned Superintendent of Police/SHO) may call a meeting of the petitioners as well as the parents of both the petitioners and their other concerned family members in his/her presence so that the parties may endeavour to resolve their dispute(s) and live amicably. 8.

Liberty is reserved in favour of private respondents to seek recall of this order on showing sufficient cause. 9.

However, if the petitioners are found to have been involved in any other case, then this order shall not preclude the competent authority from taking lawful action against the petitioners. 10.

The petition stands disposed off. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed off.

(SUMEET GOEL) JUDGE 08.01.2025 P.Singh Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No PARVINDER SINGH 2025.01.08 17:30 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment