Anjali And ANR v. State Of Punjab And Others

CRWP No.3757 of 2020 (O&M) -1IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRWP No.3757 of 2020 (O&M) Date of Decision.15.06.2020 (Heard through VC) Anjali and another

...Petitioners

Vs State of Punjab and others

...Respondents

CORAM:HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JAISHREE THAKUR

Present:

Mr. Arun Gupta, Advocate for the petitioners.

-.- JAISHREE THAKUR J. (ORAL) The petitioners claim themselves to be major. They have pleaded that they have married against the wishes of respondents No.4 to 6 and seek protection to their life and liberty. They apprehend danger from respondents No.4 to 6. They have placed on record photographs Annexure P-4 evidencing their marriage. The petitioners have also submitted a representation dated 10.06.2020 (Annexure P-5) to respondent No.2 but no action has been taken so far.

Notice of motion.

On the asking of Court, Mr. Gaurav Dhuriwala, Sr. D.A.G, Punjab and Mr. Varun Mittal, Advocate, who are present through the medium of Video Conferencing accept notice for the official respondents and respondent No.5 respectively. Counsel for the petitioners is directed to e-mail a complete copy of paper book to the counsel appearing for the State during the course of day.

Learned counsel appearing for the respondent-State argues that on verification of documents with regard to age of petitioners, it has been PANKAJ KUMAR 2020.06.15 13:26 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRWP No.3757 of 2020 (O&M) -2found that petitioner No.1 is a minor and false document has been annexed. Learned counsel for appearing for respondent No.5 submits that an FIR has already been registered against petitioner No.2. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the paper book. Taking into account the contention raised by the counsel appearing for the respondent-State, this Court is of the view that petitioners cannot be denied protection to their life and liberty, if there is any threat perception at the hands of private respondents. Therefore, without commenting on the validity of the marriage allegedly performed by the petitioners and entering upon an exercise to evaluate the evidentiary value of the documents placed on the file, I dispose of this petition with direction to respondent No.

2 to decide the representation of the petitioners (Annexure P-5) within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and grant them protection, if any threat to their life and liberty is perceived. It is made clear that this order shall not be taken to protect the petitioners from legal action for violation of law, if any committed by them. (JAISHREE THAKUR) JUDGE June 15, 2020 Pankaj* Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No PANKAJ KUMAR 2020.06.