Anjali And ANR v. State Of Punjab And ORS

CRWP No.8680 of 2021 (O&M) -1IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRWP No.8680 of 2021 (O&M) Date of Decision.22.11.2021 (Heard through VC) Anjali and another

...Petitioners

Vs State of Punjab and others

...Respondents

CORAM:HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JAISHREE THAKUR

Present:

Mr. R.S. Dhaliwal, Advocate for the petitioners.

Ms. Rashmi Attri, AAG, Punjab.

Mr. Shiva Khurmi, Advocate for respondents No.4 to 10.

-.- JAISHREE THAKUR J. (ORAL) This is a petition that has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing respondents No.1 to 3 to protect the life and liberty of the petitioners at the hands of respondents No.4 to 10 as they have solemnized marriage against their wishes.

Pursuant to the filing of the instant petition, notice was issued and there was a direction for respondent No.3 to ensure that no physical harm is caused to petitioner No.1, who is daughter of respondents No.4 & 5. A status report has been filed by way of affidavit of Inspector Kamaljit Singh, SHO Police Station Rama Mandi Commissionerate Jalandhar in which it has been stated that petitioners had solemnized marriage on 06.09.2021 and despite making an effort to locate the petitioners, they have not been found. Upon enquirng about whereabouts of petitioners, tt has PANKAJ KUMAR 2021.11.24 16:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRWP No.8680 of 2021 (O&M) -2come to their knowledge that petitioners along with family members have left the premises after locking the same on 05.09.2021. However, an FIR No.119 dated 04.09.2021 has been registered under Sections 363, 366A IPC against petitioner No.2 at Police Station Mullanpur. Learned counsel appearing for petitioner No.2 would submit that petitioner No.2 is on anticipatory bail in the said FIR vide order dated 01.11.2021 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Judge, Special Court, SAS Nagar, Mohali.

At this stage, Mr. Khurmi, learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos.4 to 10 would submit that statements of the private respondents have been recorded in which they have stated that they will not harass petitioner No.1 in any manner whatsoever. She in fact stands disinherited by them. Mr. Khurmi states at bar (on instructions from private respondents) that private respondents will not harass the petitioners in any manner whatsoever.

Having heard learned counsel appearing for the parties, this Court finds that the instant petition has been rendered infructuous, however, in case the petitioners are still at threat, they will be at liberty to approach this Court afresh.

The instant petition stands dispsoed of with above observations.

(JAISHREE THAKUR) JUDGE November 22, 2021 Pankaj* Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No PANKAJ KUMAR 2021.11.24 16:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document