Sukhwinder Kaur & Another v. State Of Punjab And ORS.

CRM No.M-20874 of 2016 [1]

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No.M- 20874 of 2016(O&M) Date of Decision: June 10 , 2016.

Sukhwinder 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. Vikram Sheoran, Advocate for the petitioners.

***** LISA GILL, J.

Present petition has been filed by the petitioners for protection of their life and liberty as they apprehend danger at the hands of respondent No.4 and other relatives because they have solemnized marriage between themselves on 07.06.2016 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.

It is contended that the petitioners are major, age of petitioner No.1 being 22 years and date of birth of petitioner No.2 being 23.05.1989. True copies of Adhaar Card of petitioner No.1 and Voter Identity Card of petitioner No.2 have been appended with the petition as Annexures P1 and OMKAR SINGH 2016.06.10 17:02 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

CRM No.M-20874 of 2016 [2] P2 though perusal of Adhaar Card (Annexure P1) shows that no specific date is mentioned and only the year of birth i.e., 1994 has been mentioned. Photographs of the marriage are also placed on record as Annexure P3. Petitioner No.1 stated to have submitted a representation dated 07.06.2016 (Annexure P4) to respondent No.2 i.e., the Senior Superintendent of Police, Moga for redressal of their grievance. Notice of motion to the Advocate General, Punjab. On the asking of the Court, Mr. Ankur Jain, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab who is present in Court, accepts notice on behalf of respondents No.1 to 3. 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 - Senior Superintendent of Police, Moga is directed to look into and decide representation dated 07.06.2016 submitted by petitioner No.1 and take appropriate action as may be required, 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 or criminal proceedings initiated against the petitioners be barred due to this order.

Petition is disposed of accordingly.

( LISA GILL ) June 10 , 2016.

JUDGE 'om'

OMKAR SINGH 2016.06.10 17:02 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh