Veerpal Kaur And ANR v. State Of Punjab And ORS

CRWP-8868-2024 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRWP-8868-2024 Date of Decision: September 12, 2024 Veerpal Kaur and others ......Petitioners

Versus

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

Present:

Ms.Mandeep Kaur Gill, Advocate for the petitioners.

........

RAJESH BHARDWAJ, J.(ORAL) 1.

Present petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for directing respondents No.2 and 3 not to harass the petitioners at the instance of respondents No.4 to 5 as the petitioners have married against the wishes of private respondents with a further prayer to direct respondents No.2 and 3 to protect the lives and liberty of the petitioners and the family members of petitioner No.2. 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioners states that both the petitioners are major 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 Annexures P-3 and P-4. Petitioner No.1 has submitted a representation dated 09.09.2024, (Annexure P-5) to respondent No.2.

MEENU 2024.09.13 16:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 3.

Notice of motion to respondents No.1 to 3-State only.

CRWP-8868-2024 -24.

On asking of the Court, Mr.Tarun Aggarwal, Sr.DAG, Punjab, who is present in Court, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents/State. 5.

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-Commissioner of Police, District Ludhiana, to decide the representation (Annexure P-5) of petitioner No.1 and grant protection to the petitioners, 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. September 12, 2024 ( RAJESH BHARDWAJ ) meenuss JUDGE 1.

Whether speaking/reasoned ?

Yes/No 2.

Whether reportable ?

Yes/No MEENU 2024.09.13 16:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document