Mohamed Abdula And ANR v. State Of Punjab And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Writ Petition No. 11203 of 2021 (O&M) Date of Decision: 26.11.2021 Mohamed Abdula and another .......... Petitioners

Versus

State of Punjab and others .......... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESHWAR THAKUR

Present:

Mr. Sarvesh Kumar Gupta, Advocate for the petitioners. Ms. Bhavna Gupta, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab [ Through Video Conferencing ] **** SURESHWAR THAKUR, J. (ORAL) 1.

The present petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a writ in the nature of a mandamus hence directing respondent Nos. 2 & 3 to give protection to the life, and, liberty of the petitioners, and against any interference in the peaceful life of the petitioners being made at the behest of respondent Nos. 4 to 6. 2.

The learned State Counsel, does not have any objection, to an order being made by this Court to respondents concerned, to look into and decide through a speaking order, representation Annexure P-5. 3.

Consequently, this Court directs respondents concerned, to within three weeks hereafter, hence decide Annexure P-5, through a speaking order.

4.

Petition is disposed of.

5.

However, before the authorities concerned, mete compliance with the afore made order, they shall ensure, that the run away marriage solemnized, inter se, the co-petitioners, was a sequel to both acquiring the DINESH KUMAR 2021.11.26 17:18 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

C.R.W.P. No. 11203 of 2021 (O&M) -2relevant age of majority. Moreover, the afore order is also subject to, the father-in-law of co-petitioner No. 1 (husband), not making any complaint with respect to his daughter, being abducted by the afore co-petitioner No.

1. In case during the spell of the decision, being taken, upon the afore representation (Annexure P-5) by the authorities concerned, co-petitioner No. 2, has not evidently acquired majority, thereupon, she be returned to the custody of her father, arrayed as co-respondent No. 4 herein, and, in case, she has acquired majority, thereupon, subject to her apposite volition, being ascertained, she be permitted to stay in the company of co-petitioner No. 1. 6.

A copy of this order be given dasti on payment of usual charges.

November 26, 2021 ( SURESHWAR THAKUR ) 'dk kamra'

JUDGE Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No DINESH KUMAR 2021.11.26 17:18 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document