Ritika And ANR v. State Of Punjab And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH CRWP No.234 of 2021 (O&M) DATE OF DECISION: 11.01.2021 Ritika and another .....Petitioners versus State of Punjab and others .....Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ALKA SARIN
Present:
Mr. Amit Wadhwa, Advocate for the petitioners ..
ALKA SARIN, J. (Oral):
Heard through video conferencing.
This is a Criminal Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a direction to respondent Nos.2 and 3 to protect the life and liberty of the petitioners at the hands of respondent Nos.4 to 7.
The learned counsel for the petitioners would contend that both the petitioners are major, the date of birth of petitioner No.1 being 09.11.2000 and that of petitioner No.2 being 19.12.1996 (Aadhaar Cards have been appended as Annexures P-1 and P-2, respectively). The learned counsel would further contend that the petitioners, who were in love, were compelled to run away from home and they solemnized their marriage on 06.01.2021 as per Hindu rites and ceremonies. The learned counsel would further contend that the petitioners belong to different communities and have been receiving serious threats to their life and liberty at the hands of the family members of petitioner No.1. In this regard, a representation dated 06.01.2021 (Annexure P-4) has also been sent to the Commissioner of Police, Ludhiana (respondent No.2).
CRWP No.234 of 2021 -2However, no action has been taken. The learned counsel would further contend that at this stage he would be satisfied if a direction is given to decide the representation dated 06.01.2021 in a time-bound manner. On the asking of the Court, Mr. V.G. Jauhar, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab has joined the session through video conferencing (VC) and accepts notice on behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 3. Mr. Naveen Sharma, Advocate, who has also joined the Court proceedings through VC, accepts notice on behalf of private respondent Nos.4 to 7.
The learned counsel for the private respondents would contend that respondent Nos.4 to 7 are the parents of petitioner No.1 and they only wish to meet the girl once.
I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. The petitioners in the present case are both major and have solemnized their marriage against the wishes of parents of petitioner No.1. The petitioners being major are free to live their lives on their own terms. Article 21 of the Constitution of India provides that no person shall be deprived of his or her personal life and liberty except in accordance with law. The petitioners belong to different communities and, after their marriage, are apprehending threat to their life and liberty at the hands of respondent Nos.4 to 7 and their apprehension needs to be addressed.
Keeping in view the apprehension as expressed by the petitioners in the petition, without expressing any opinion with regard to the veracity of the contents of the petition and the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioners, the Commissioner of Police, Ludhiana (respondent No.2) is directed to decide the representation (Annexure P-4)
CRWP No.234 of 2021 -3and take necessary action as per law. However, since respondent Nos.4 to 7 have also put in appearance and have expressed their desire to meet petitioner No.1 once, the respondent Nos.4 to 7 are allowed to meet petitioner No.1 in the presence of a Lady Constable at Police Station, Daresi Division, Ludhiana on 15.01.2021 at 12.00 noon. Respondent Nos.2 and 3 shall ensure that no harm is caused to the petitioners when they visit the Police Station to meet respondent Nos.4 to 7. The petition is accordingly disposed off.
It is, however, made clear that this order shall not, in any manner, be construed as an expression of opinion on the validity of the marriage and shall have no effect on any other civil or criminal proceedings, if any, instituted/pending against the petitioners. (ALKA SARIN) JUDGE 11.01.2021 parkash NOTE:
Whether speaking/non-speaking: Speaking Whether reportable: YES/NO