Jasveer Kaur & ANR v. State Of Punjab & ORS

[1]

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No.M- 18715 of 2015(O&M) Date of Decision: June 1 , 2015.

Jasveer Kaur and another ...... PETITIONER (s)

Versus

State of Punjab and others ...... RESPONDENT (s) CORAM:- HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE LISA GILL

Present:

Petitioners in person with Mr. Vijay Kumar, Advocate for the petitioners.

***** LISA GILL, J.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that due to an inadvertent mistake, both the petitioners are stated to belong to the same caste i.e., Mazbi Sikh in para 3 of the petition whereas, it is only petitioner No.2 - Lakhvir Singh who is Mazbi Sikh.

Present petition has been filed by the petitioners for protection of their life and liberty as they apprehend danger at the hands of respondents No.4 to 6 and other relatives because they have contracted marriage between themselves on 28.05.2015 against the wishes of the said respondents. Both the petitioners are present in Court and on being asked submit that they have contracted marriage between themselves out of their free will and volition.

[2] It is contended that the petitioners are major, their dates of birth being 07.09.1996 and 30.09.1991, respectively. True copy of Matriculation Examination Certificate of petitioner No.1 has been appended with the petition as Annexure P1 whereas, only affidavit regarding date of birth of petitioner No.2 has been appended with the petition as it is stated that he does not have any documentary proof regarding his age as the same are not readily available. Photographs of the marriage are also placed on record as Annexure P3. The petitioners are stated to have submitted a representation dated 28.05.2015, Annexure P4, to respondent No.2 i.e., the Superintendent of Police, Fazilka for redressal of their grievance.

Notice of motion to the Advocate General, Punjab. On the asking of the Court, Mr. Jasdev Singh Brar, Additional Advocate General, Punjab who is present in the Court, accepts notice on behalf of respondents No.1 to 3. Two copies of the petition have been handed over to learned State counsel.

Without commenting upon the age of the petitioners or the validity of their marriage or the validity and genuineness of the certificates appended with the petition, respondent No.2 - Superintendent of Police, Fazilka is directed to decide representation dated 28.05.2015 submitted by the petitioners and take appropriate action keeping in view the threat perception to the petitioners.

It is, however, made clear that this order shall have no effect on the validity of the alleged marriage of the petitioners and neither will any other civil

[3] or criminal proceedings initiated against the petitioners be barred due to this order.

Petition is disposed of accordingly.

( LISA GILL ) June 1 , 2015.

JUDGE 'om'