Manpreet Kaur And Another v. State Of Punjab And Others

CRWP-757-2025 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRWP-757-2025 Date of Decision: January 24, 2025 Manpreet Kaur and another ......Petitioners

Versus

State of Punjab and others ......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ

Present:

Mr.Arunjeet Singh Kakkar, Advocate for the petitioners.

........

RAJESH BHARDWAJ, J.(ORAL) 1.

Present petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of direction to respondents No.1 to 3 to protect the life and liberty of the petitioners from the hands of respondents No.4 and 5 and not to interfere in their matrimonial life at the behest of respondents No.4 and 5 and other relatives and friends by taking into consideration, representation, dated 21.01.2025, Annexure P-5. 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioners states that both the petitioners are major and have married against the wishes of respondents No.4 and 5 and have sought protection to their life and liberty. They apprehend danger from respondents No.4 and 5. Their marriage certificate and photographs evidencing their marriage are on record as Annexures P-3 and P-4. The petitioners have submitted a representation dated 21.01.2025 (Annexure P-5) to respondent No.2.

MEENU 2025.01.24 13:58 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 3.

Notice of motion to respondents No.1 to 3-State only.

CRWP-757-2025 -24.

On asking of the Court, Mr.Tarun Aggarwal, Sr.DAG, Punjab, who is present in Court, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents/State. 5.

Without entering upon an exercise to evaluate the evidentiary value of the documents placed on the file, I dispose of the petition with a direction to respondent No.2-Senior Superintendent of Police, Moga, District Moga, to decide the representation (Annexure P-5) of the petitioners and grant them protection, if any threat to their life and liberty is perceived. It is clarified that this order shall not be taken to grant immunity to the petitioners from legal action for violation of law, if any, committed by them. This order would not be understood having expressed any opinion whatsoever by this Court on the validity of the marriage of the petitioners. January 24, 2025 ( RAJESH BHARDWAJ ) meenuss JUDGE 1.

Whether speaking/reasoned ?

Yes/No 2.

Whether reportable ?

Yes/No\ MEENU 2025.01.24 13:58 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document