Ruby Kumari And ANR v. State Of Haryana And ORS

CRM No.M-5646 of 2015 [1]

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM No.M- 5646 of 2015(O&M) Date of Decision: February 20, 2015.

Ruby Kumari and another ...... PETITIONER (s)

Versus

State of Haryana and others ...... RESPONDENT (s) CORAM:- HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE LISA GILL

Present:

Petitioners in person with Mr. B.S.Jaswal, 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.5 to 7 and other relatives because they are stated to have contracted marriage between themselves on 15.02.2015 against the wishes of the said respondents. Both the petitioners are present in Court and on being asked submit that they have contracted marriage between themselves out of their free will and volition.

It is contended that the petitioners are major, their dates of birth being 09.05.1994 and 11.01.1994, respectively. True copies of PAN Card of petitioner No.1 and Secondary Examination certificate of petitioner No.2 have OMKAR SINGH 2015.02.20 17:31 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

CRM No.M-5646 of 2015 [2] been appended with the petition as Annexures P3 and P4. A copy of the Marriage Certificate and the photographs of the marriage are also placed on record as Annexures P1 and P2. The petitioners are stated to have submitted a representation dated 16.02.2015 (Annexure P5) to respondent No.2 i.e., the Superintendent of Police, Panipat for redressal of their grievance. Notice of motion to the Advocate General, Haryana. On the asking of the Court, Mr. Anmol Malik, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana who is present in the Court, accepts notice on behalf of respondents No.1 to 4. 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 - Superintendent of Police, Panipat is directed to decide representation dated 16.02.2015 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 order.

Petition is disposed of accordingly.

( LISA GILL ) February 20, 2015.

JUDGE 'om'

OMKAR SINGH 2015.02.20 17:31 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh