Ravi And Another v. State Of Haryana And Others

CRWP No.7213 of 2025 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ***** CRWP No.7213 of 2025 Date of decision : 7.7.2025 Ravi and another .............Petitioners

Versus

State of Haryana and others .......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Present: Mr. Nirmal Singh, Advocate, for the petitioners --- SUMEET GOEL, J. (ORAL) 1.

By way of present petition filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, petitioners are seeking issuance of directions to the official respondents to protect their life and liberty at the hands of respondent Nos.4 and 5.

2.

Notice of motion to respondents No.1 to 3.

3.

On the asking of the Court, Mr. Ashish Bishnoi, DAG, Haryana accepts notice on behalf of the official respondents. 4.

As per the petitioners, they have married on 7.7.2025 against the wishes of respondent Nos. 4 and 5, who happen to be the family members/relative of the petitioners.

5.

Both the petitioners have claimed themselves to be major relying upon their Aadhar Cards indicating that date of birth of petitioner No.1-Ravi is 20.5.2001 and petitioner No.2-Anjali is 1.1.2006. Ashwani Kumar 2025.07.08 09:32 I am the author of this document

CRWP No.7213 of 2025 -26. Without commenting on the legality and validity of the marriage as also the merits of contentions raised in the petition, I deem it appropriate to direct respondent No.2- Superintendent of Police, Kaithal to look into the representation dated 7.7.2025 (Annexure P-5) stated to have been submitted by the petitioners & pass appropriate orders thereupon within two weeks from today.

7.

Keeping in view the fact that both the petitioners claim to have married against the wishes of their family(s), I direct that if possible, respondent No.2- Superintendent of Police, Kaithal may call a meeting of the petitioners as well as the parents of both the petitioners and their other concerned family members in his/her presence so that the parties may endeavour to resolve their dispute(s) and live amicably. 8.

Liberty is reserved in favour of private respondents to seek recall of this order on showing sufficient cause. 9.

However, if the petitioners are found to have been involved in any other case, then this order shall not preclude the competent authority from taking lawful action against the petitioners. 10.

The petition stands disposed of. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.

(SUMEET GOEL) JUDGE 7.7.2025 Ashwani Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No Ashwani Kumar 2025.07.08 09:32 I am the author of this document