Priya And Another v. State Of Haryana And Others

CRWP-8947-2022 (O&M)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRWP-8947-2022 (O&M) Date of Decision: September 16, 2022 Priya and another

...Petitioners

Versus

State of Haryana and others

...Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH

Present:

Mr. Kuldeep Sharma, Advocate, Mr. Aakash Juneja, Advocate, for the petitioners.

Mr. Vikas Bhardwaj, AAG, Haryana.

SANJAY VASHISTH, J.

CRM-W-1284-2022:

This is an application, under Rule 3(A)(i), Chapter 6, Part-B, Volume-V, of the High Court Rules and Orders, seeking leave to appear, act or plead before this Court.

For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed as prayed for.

CRWP-9847-2022:

1.

Prayer in the instant petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is for issuance of directions to respondents Nos. 2 and 3, to provide protection of life and liberty to the petitioners, who have married against wishes of private respondent Nos. 4 and 5. 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that Petitioner No.1 - Priya, aged about 181⁄2 years and petitioner No.2 - Vinay, aged JAWALA RAM 2022.09.17 15:01 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.

CRWP-8947-2022 (O&M) about 25 years, have got married on 05.09.2022, against wishes of their family members, arrayed as respondent Nos. 4 and 5. It has been further submitted that private respondents are threatening and trying to interfere in the marital life of the petitioners. Hence, they are seeking protection in that regard and have approached this Court by way of filing the instant petition.

3.

Notice of motion.

4.

On the asking of the Court, Mr. Vikas Bhardwaj, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana, who is present in the Court, accepts notice on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 to 3 (State).

5.

In view of the above, present petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No. 2 - Superintendent of Police, Sonipat, to look into the representation dated 12.09.2022 (Annexure P-5), qua threat perception, if any, and take necessary steps, if any required, in accordance with law, to ensure that life and liberty of the petitioners is not jeopardized at the hands of private respondents. However, this direction will not validate the marriage said to have taken place between petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 and will have no effect on any civil or criminal action, which could be initiated in the matter in accordance with law. (SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE September 16, 2022 Pkapoor Whether Speaking/Reasoned:

YES/NO Whether Reportable:

YES/NO JAWALA RAM 2022.09.17 15:01 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.