Root And Another v. State Of Punjab And Others

CRM No.M-3676 of 2017 [1]

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM No.M- 3676 of 2017(O&M) Date of Decision: February 3 , 2017.

Root 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. Jatinder Singh Gill, Advocate for the petitioners.

***** LISA GILL, J.

The present petition has been filed by the petitioners for protection of their life and liberty as they apprehend danger at the hands of respondents No.4 to 7 and other relatives because they have married each other on 01.02.2017 against the wishes of the said respondents. Both the petitioners are present in Court and on being asked submit that they have solemnized marriage between themselves out of their own free will and volition. It is contended that the petitioners are major, their dates of birth being 02.06.1994 and 03.04.1994, respectively. True copies of Adhaar Cards of both the petitioners have been appended with the petition as Annexures P1 and P2. A perusal of Annexure P2 shows that no specific date is mentioned and only the year of birth i.e., 1994 has been mentioned. Photographs of the marriage and a copy of the Marriage Certificate are also placed on record as Omkar Singh 2017.02.06 12:46 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

CRM No.M-3676 of 2017 [2] Annexures P3 and P4. It is submitted that the petitioners have submitted a representation dated 01.02.2017 (Annexure P5) to respondent No.2 i.e., the Senior Superintendent of Police, Batala for redressal of their grievance but no action has been taken thereon.

Notice of motion to the Advocate General, Punjab. On the asking of the Court, Ms. Shivali, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab who is present in the Court, accepts notice on behalf of respondents No.1 to 3. A copy of the petition has been handed over to learned counsel for the State.

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, Batala is directed to decide the representation dated 01.02.2017 submitted by the petitioners and take appropriate action 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 ) February 3 , 2017.

JUDGE 'om'

Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No Omkar Singh 2017.02.06 12:46 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh