Reena And Another v. State Of U.T Chandigarh And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRWP-11203-2022 Decided on : 30.11.2022 Reena and another . . . Petitioner(s)

Versus

State of UT, Chandigarh and others . . . Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH PRESENT: Mr. Bhupender Singh, 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 lives and liberty of the petitioners, who have married against the wishes of private respondents. 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioner No.1 - Reena, aged about 19 years and petitioner No.2 - Ankit, aged about 21 years, have marriage on 21.11.2022, against the wishes of their family members, arrayed as respondents No.4 & 5. 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 21.11.2022 (Annexure P-5) to respondent No.2 - Sr. Superintendent of Police, UT, Chandigarh, wherein, they have expressed their apprehension.

3.

Notice of motion.

4.

On advance notice, Mr. Anupam Bansal, Addl. PP, UT JAWALA RAM 2022.11.30 15:33 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgement.

CRWP- 11203 -2022 - 2 - Chandigarh, puts in appearance and accepts notice on behalf of respondents No.1 to 3 (State).

5.

In view of the above, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2 - Sr. Superintendent of Police, UT Chandigarh, to look into the representation dated 21.11.2022 (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 30, 2022 J.Ram Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether Reportable:

Yes/No JAWALA RAM 2022.11.30 15:33 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgement.