Rajni & ANR v. State Of Punjab & ORS

[1]

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No.M- 39820 of 2015(O&M) Date of Decision: November 23 , 2015.

Rajni 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. Dheeraj Mahajan, Advocate for the petitioners.

***** LISA GILL, J.

At the outset, it is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that due to typographical error, respondent No.2 has wrongly been mentioned as Senior Superintendent of Police, Amritsar whereas, it should have been Senior Superintendent of Police, Gurdaspur.

Let necessary correction be carried out in the memo of parties. 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 12 and other relatives because they have contracted marriage between themselves on 19.11.2015 against the wishes of the said respondents. Both the petitioners are present in Court and on being asked submit that they have

[2] contracted marriage between themselves out of their free will and volition. It is contended that the petitioners are major, their age being 19 and 25 years, respectively. True copies of Adhaar Cards of both the petitioners have been appended with the petition as Annexures P1 and P2 though perusal of Annexure P1 and P2 shows that no specific date is mentioned and only the year of birth i.e., 1996 and 1990 have been mentioned. A copy of the Marriage Certificate and photographs of the marriage are also placed on record as Annexures P3 and P4. Petitioners are stated to have submitted a representation dated 19.11.2015 (Annexure P5) to respondent No.3 i.e., the SHO, Police Station Sadar, Gurdaspur for redressal of their grievance. Notice of motion to the Advocate General, Punjab. On the asking of the Court, Mr. D.S.Sobti, Additional Advocate General, Punjab who is present in the Court, accepts notice on behalf of respondents No.1 to 3. Two copies of the petition have been handed over to learned State counsel.

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, Gurdaspur is directed to decide representation dated 19.11.2015 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

[3] order.

Petition is disposed of accordingly.

( LISA GILL ) November 23 , 2015.

JUDGE 'om'