Sharanjit Kaur And ANR v. State Of Punjab And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRWP-431-2023 Decided on : 17.01.2023 Sharanjit Kaur and another . . . Petitioner(s)

Versus

State of Punjab and others . . . Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH PRESENT: Mr. Virender Singh, Advocate for the petitioners.

**** SANJAY VASHISTH , J. (Oral) Prayer in the instant petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is for issuance of directions to respondents No.2 and 3, to provide protection of lives and liberty of the petitioners, who have married against the wishes of private respondent. 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioner No.1 - Sharanjit Kaur, aged about 27 years and petitioner No.2 - Bharat, aged about 27 years, have solemnized marriage on 11.01.2023, against the wishes of their family members, arrayed as respondent No.4. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that it is the first marriage of both the petitioners. It has been submitted that the private respondent is threatening to interfere in the matrimonial life of the petitioners. Hence, the petitioners are seeking protection in that regard and have approached this Court by way of filing the instant petition. They have also submitted a representation dated 11.01.2023 (Annexure P-5), to respondent No.2 - Senior Superintendent of Police, Pathankot, Punjab, wherein, they have expressed their apprehension.

3. Notice of motion.

KAVITA NAIN 2023.01.17 16:15 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

CRWP-431 -2023 - 24.

On asking of the Court, Mr. Anmol Singh Sandhu, AAG, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of respondents No.1 to 3 (State). 5.

In view of the above, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2 - Senior Superintendent of Police, Pathankot, Punjab, to look into the representation dated 11.01.2023 (Annexure P-5), qua threat perception, and if there is any substance in it, take necessary steps, in accordance with law, to ensure that the lives and liberty of the petitioners are not jeopardized at the hands of the private respondent. 6.

However, this direction will not validate the marriage said to have taken place between the parties and will have no effect on any civil or criminal action, which could be initiated in the matter in accordance with law.

(SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE January 17, 2023 K.Nain Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether Reportable:

Yes/No KAVITA NAIN 2023.01.17 16:15 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment