Amandeep v. State Of Punjab And ORS
CRWP-2594-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH CRWP-2594-2025 Date of decision: 19.09.2025 Amandeep
...Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab and others
...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE AARADHNA SAWHNEY Present :
None for the petitioner.
Mr. Gautam Thapar, Sr. DAG, Punjab.
Mr. Ravi Malhotra, Advocate for respondents No.4 and 5.
***** AARADHNA SAWHNEY, J.(ORAL) 1.
This Habeous Corpus petition has been filed by one Amandeep, aged about 39 years, w/o Didar, resident of Village Mianwal Araian, Jalandhar, claiming to be a social worker of the area, alleging therein that Detenue-Manpreet Kaur, aged about 33 years, daughter of respondents No.4 and 5 is being pressurized by them to get married to a person of their choice. When Manpreet Kaur refused, she was locked inside the house. Thus, the petitioner claims that being adult, Manpreet Kaur could not have been kept in captivity and cannot be forced to get married by any person not of her choice.
2.
As can be inferred from the previous proceedings, notice was issued to the respondents including the parents of Detenue-Manpreet Kaur, who are impleaded as respondents No.4 and 5. In the status report filed by the State, specific mention has been made to the statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. (183 of BNSS) of the Detenue, wherein she had stated that she had earlier been married to one Ajay Kumar and after she broke the HAMANT 2025.09.22 11:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CRWP-2594-2025 ties with him, she has been residing with her parents. It was further stated by her that all the grievances with her parents had been sorted out. 3.
On the previous date of hearing, since the counsel for the petitioner was not available, the petition was adjourned for today i.e. 19.09.2025. Even today, none has appeared on behalf of the petitioner. Further, it has been pointed out by learned State counsel that Manpreet Kaur has again left the parental home and a missing report has been lodged by her father.
Reply of respondents No.4 and 5 mentioning these facts have also been placed on record.
4.
In view of the reasons mentioned hereinabove, nothing survives in the present petition and the same is hereby dismissed. (AARADHNA SAWHNEY) JUDGE 19.09.2025 Hemant Whether speaking/reasoned :
Yes / No Whether reportable :
Yes / No HAMANT 2025.09.22 11:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document