Aareena Rani And ANR v. State Of Punjab And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRWP No.3489 of 2020 Decided on: 08.06.2020 Aareena Rani and another ... Petitioners

Versus

State of Punjab and others ... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S. SANDHAWALIA Present :

Mr. Kuldip Singh, Advocate for the petitioners.

***** G.S. Sandhawalia , J. (Oral) The present petition has been taken up by way of video conference as per instructions in view of COVID-19 pandemic. In the petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners seek directions to provide protection to the life and liberty from the private respondents No.4 to 6, who are relatives of petitioner No.1, on account of their marriage which has taken place on 01.06.2020 as per Sikh rites and ceremonies at Gurudwara Guru Nanak Singh Darbar, Street No.3, Navi Abadi, Tehsil Fazilka, District Fazilka, Punjab. The marriage certificate and photographs of the marriage have been appended as Annexures P-3 and P-4, respectively. The petitioners are stated to be major, as the date of birth of petitioner No.1 is 01.01.1998 as per Aadhaar Card (Annexure P-1) and the date of birth of petitioner No.2 is of the year 1993 as per Aadhaar Card (Annexure P-2).

PARVEEN KUMAR 2020.06.08 16:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document phhc

CRWP No.3489 of 2020 -2A representation dated 01.06.2020 (Annexure P-5) has also been filed with respondent No.2 in this regard. Notice of motion.

Mr. SPS Tinna, Additional AG, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of the respondents/State. Copy of the paper-book be supplied to him by way of e-mail today itself. Mr. Tinna submits that as per instructions from ASI Puran Chand, respondent No.4-father of petitioner No.1 got recorded his statement that he has no objection to the marriage of the parties.

After hearing counsel for the petitioners, without commenting upon the validity/legality of the marriage or the age of the petitioners and in view of the binding precedent of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Lata Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another 2006(2) SCC (Criminal) 478, the present petition is disposed of with the direction to respondent No.2 to look into the above said representation filed by the petitioners and take appropriate action in accordance with law and provide protection, if so required.

The Court fees/process fee/Advocate Welfare Stamp shall be deposited the moment the instructions are modified as such and physical presence is allowed. It is made clear that in case the needful is not done, the order shall be liable to be recalled at the detriment of parties. (G.S. SANDHAWALIA) JUNE 08, 2020 JUDGE Parveen Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable:

Yes/No PARVEEN KUMAR 2020.06.08 16:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document phhc