Chetna Sharma And ANR v. State Of U.T. Chandigarh And ORS

CRM-M No. 22887 of 2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M No. 22887 of 2017 DATE OF DECISION :- September 22, 2017 Chetna Sharma and another

...Petitioner

Versus

State of U.T. Chandigarh and others

...Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S. MADAAN Present:- None for the petitioners.

Mr. Amit Kumar Goyal, APP, U.T. Chandigarh for respondents no. 1 to 3.

*** Mr. Sunil Garg, Advocate files vakalatnama for the respondent. The same is taken on record.

Again there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. As per communication sent by Senior Superintendent of Police, U.T. Chandigarh to this Court, the matter had been got looked into by SDPO/South, who has reported that statements of petitioner couple have been recorded in which they have stated that at present they do not have any danger from anyone and statements of respondents no. 4 and 5 have also been recorded besides they have been advised not to interfere in the married life of the petitioner since both are major and have performed marriage with their sweet will.

Learned counsel for the respondents no. 4 and 5 states that such respondents have neither interfered in marital life of petitioners nor they Parvinder Singh 2017.09.22 17:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

CRM-M No. 22887 of 2017 would do so. The petitioners have not come present. Similar was the position on last date of hearing. It means that petitioners are not interested to prosecute the petition.

Dismissed.

(H.S. MADAAN) JUDGE September 22, 2017 p.singh Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No Parvinder Singh 2017.09.22 17:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh