Simranjeet Singh And Another v. Union Territory Of Chandigarh And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRWP-10825-2022 Decided on : 17.11.2022 Simranjeet Singh and another . . . Petitioner(s)

Versus

Union Territory, Chandigarh and others . . . Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH PRESENT: Mr. Manpreet Singh Kanda, Advocate for the petitioners.

**** SANJAY VASHISTH , J. (Oral) Prayer in the instant petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is for issuance of directions to respondents No.2 & 3, to provide protection of life and liberty to the petitioners, who have married against the wishes of private respondents.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioner No.1 - Simranjeet Singh, aged about 23 years and petitioner No.2 - Abhijeet Kaur, aged about 22 years, have got married on 12.11.2022, against the wishes of their family members, arrayed as respondents No.4 to 8. It has been submitted that the private respondents are threatening to interfere in the matrimonial life of the petitioners. Hence, the petitioners are seeking protection in that regard and have approached this Court by way of filing the instant petition. They have also submitted a representation dated 14.11.2022 (Annexure P-5) to respondent No.2 - Sr. Superintendent of Police, U.T. Chandigarh, wherein, they have expressed their apprehension. 3.

Notice of motion.

4.

On advance notice, Mr. Viranjeet Singh Mahal, Addl. PP, UT JAWALA RAM 2022.11.17 17:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRWP- 10825 -2022 - 2 - Chandigarh, appears and accepts notice on behalf of official respondents No.1 to 3.

5.

In view of the above, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2 - Sr. Superintendent of Police, U.T. Chandigarh, to look into the representation dated 14.11.2022 (Annexure P-5), qua threat perception, and if there is any substance in it, take necessary steps, in accordance with law, to ensure that the lives and liberty of the petitioners is not jeopardized at the hands of the private respondents. 6.

However, this direction will not validate the marriage said to have taken place between the parties 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 November 17, 2022 J.Ram Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether Reportable:

Yes/No JAWALA RAM 2022.11.17 17:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document