Juli Kumari v. State Of Haryana And Others
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH CRWP-794-2022 Decided on : 31.01.2023 Juli Kumari and another . . . Petitioner(s)
Versus
State of Haryana and others . . . Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH PRESENT: Mr. S.K. Verma, Advocate for the petitioner(s).
Mr. Vikas Bhardwaj, AAG, Haryana.
**** SANJAY VASHISTH , J. (Oral) 1.
As per office report, fresh notices issued to respondents No.5 to 6 were not received back served or otherwise. Yet, it is reported that notices ordered to be served through SHO, have been served upon respondents No.5 & 6.
2.
Prayer in the instant petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is for issuance of directions to respondents No.2 to 4, to provide protection of lives and liberty of the petitioners, who have married against the wishes of private respondents.
3.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioner No.1 - Juli Kumari, aged 18 years and petitioner No.2 - Manjeet Verma, aged 32 years, have solemnized marriage on 23.01.2022, against the wishes of their family members, arrayed as respondents No.5 & 6. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that it is the first marriage of petitioner No.1, and second marriage of petitioner No.2. Petitioner No.2 has already obtained divorce from his earlier wife through a decree of divorce dated 04.09.2020 (Annexure P-9), passed in a petition under Section 13-B (1) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, by Ld. Principal District Judge, Family Court, Bhiwani. 4.
Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that the private respondents are threatening to interfere in the matrimonial life of the petitioners. Hence, the petitioners are seeking protection in that regard and JAWALA RAM 2023.01.31 19:35 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgement.
CRWP-794-2022 - 2 - have approached this Court by way of filing the instant petition. They have also submitted a representation dated 24.01.2022 (Annexure P-7), to respondent No.2 - Superintendent of Police, District Bhiwani [wrongly mentioned as Senior Superintendent of Police, Bhiwani, District Bhiwani, in both memo of parties and representation dated 24.01.2022 (Annexure P-7)], wherein, they have expressed their apprehension. 5.
Upon notice of motion having been issued on 28.01.2022, learned State counsel has put in appearance on behalf of respondents No.1 to 4 (State).
6.
In view of the above, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to to respondent No.2 - Superintendent of Police, District Bhiwani, to look into the representation dated 24.01.2022 (Annexure P-7), 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 respondents. 7.
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 31, 2023 J.Ram Whether speaking/reasoned:
Yes/No Whether Reportable:
Yes/No JAWALA RAM 2023.01.31 19:35 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgement.