Parmila Devi v. State Of Punjab And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 23.05.2025 PARMILA DEVI ....Petitioner(s)

VERSUS

STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS ....Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUKHVINDER KAUR

Present:

Mr. Deshpreet Singh, Advocate for the petitioner **** SUKHVINDER KAUR , J. (Oral) 1.

Prayer in the instant petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS, is for issuance of directions to respondents No.1 to 4 to take legal action against private respondent No.5 to 7 for filing false and frivolous complaints resulting in unnecessary harassment to the petitioner and to ensure that not to call the petitioner unnecessarily to police station or by the CIA staff at the behest of frivolous complaints filed by private respondent Nos.5 to 7, as petitioner and her family members are not in contact with the boy - Sudhir Kumar and the girl - Priyanka Kumari who had solemnized their marriage with free will and consent. 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the son of the petitioner namely Sudhir Kumar and one Priyanka Kumari fell in love and solemnized marriage on 27.02.2025 with their own free will and without the consent of their family members. Thereafter, they filed CRWP No.2962 of 2025 before this Court seeking protection of their life and

liberty. Vide order dated 28.03.2025, this Court had disposed of the aforesaid petition by granting liberty to the petitioners to approach "One Stop Sakhi Centre", District Fazilka for redressal of their grievances. Despite aforesaid marriage and order dated 28.03.2025 passed by this Court, both Sudhir Kumar and Priyanka Kumari appeared before police officials of Police Station Salasar on 05.04.2025 in response to the missing complaint dated 03.04.2025 filed by respondent No.5 (father of Priyanka Kumari) at Police Station Salasar, Rajasthan and got their statements recorded that they are living separately and their whereabouts are not known to the petitioner or their family members. However, on 18.04.2025, respondent Nos.5 to 7 visited the house of the petitioner at Abohar and threatened them to arrange a meeting with Priyanka Kumari failing which the petitioner would face dire consequences. Hence, the petitioner is seeking protection in that regard and has approached this Court by way of filing the instant petition. 3.

During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that he would be satisfied if the representation dated 25.04.2025 (Annexure P-2), which had already been moved before respondent No.2 - Senior Superintendent of Police, Fazilka is looked into. 4.

Notice of motion.

5.

Ms. Gagandeep Kaur, DAG, Punjab, accepts notice and submitted that she has no objection if the aforesaid representation dated 25.04.2025 (Annexure P-2) is looked into.

6.

In view of the above, the petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2 - Senior Superintendent of Police, Fazilka, to

look into the representation dated 25.04.2025 (Annexure P-2) and to take appropriate action, if any required at the earliest. Disposed of.

(SUKHVINDER KAUR) May 23, 2025 JUDGE Sangeeta Whether reasoned/speaking:

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No