Nazia Begum And Another v. State Of Punjab And Others

CRWP-7662-2024 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRWP-7662-2024 Date of Decision: August 09, 2024 Nazia Begum and another ......Petitioners

Versus

State of Punjab and others ......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ

Present:

Ms.Geeteshwar Saini, Advocate for Ms.Sukhveer Kaur, Advocate for the petitioners.

........

RAJESH BHARDWAJ, J.(ORAL) Present petition has been filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for directing respondents no.1 to 3 to protect the life and liberty of the petitioners and not to interfere in their married life at the best of respondents no.4 and 5. It is further prayed to direct official respondents to ensure the security of the life and liberty of the petitioners which is at the eminent danger at the hands of respondents No.4 and 5 and their other relatives/friends.

Learned counsel for the petitioners states that both the petitioners have attained the age of marriage and have married against the wishes of respondents no.4 and 5 and have sought protection to their life and liberty. They apprehend danger from respondents no.4 and 5. Their marriage certificate and photographs evidencing their marriage are on record as MEENU 2024.08.09 16:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Annexures P-3 and P-4. The petitioners have submitted a representation

CRWP-7662-2024 -2dated 01.08.2024 (Annexure P-5) to respondent no.2. Notice of motion to respondents no.1 to 3-State only. On asking of the Court, Mr.J.S.Arora, DAG, Punjab, who is present in Court, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents/State. Without entering upon an exercise to evaluate the evidentiary value of the documents placed on the file, I dispose of the petition with a direction to respondent no.2-Senior Superintendent of Police, District Pathankot, to decide the representation (Annexure P-5) of the petitioners and grant them protection, if any threat to their life and liberty is perceived. It is clarified that this order shall not be taken to grant immunity to the petitioners from legal action for violation of law, if any, committed by them. This order would not be understood having expressed any opinion whatsoever by this Court on the validity of the marriage of the petitioners. August 09, 2024 ( RAJESH BHARDWAJ ) meenuss JUDGE 1.

Whether speaking/reasoned ?

Yes/No 2.

Whether reportable ?

Yes/No MEENU 2024.08.09 16:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document