Savita Rani And Another v. State Of Punjab And Others

CRM-M-55694-2018 (O & M) -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-55694-2018 (O & M) Date of Decision:28.02.2019 Savita Rani and another

...Petitioners

Versus

State of Punjab and others

...Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ BAJAJ

Present:

Mr. Kuldeep Singh, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr. Bhupender Beniwal, AAG, Punjab.

*** MANOJ BAJAJ, J.

Petitioners have filed this petition seeking protection of their life and liberty on the ground that they have entered into a marriage against the wishes of parents of petitioner No.1 i.e. respondents No.3 to 7 (father and relatives of petitioner No.1).

On 15.12.2018, learned State counsel was requested to find out the existence of alleged threat and on 28.12.2018, it was apprised that statement of respondent No.3-Satpal Singh, father of petitioner No.1, stands recorded, who has accepted the marriage of the petitioners.

Learned State counsel has also produced the statement of father of petitioner No.1 recorded on 09.12.2018, i.e. prior to the marriage, wherein it is specifically stated by him that he has no objection to the relationship of petitioner No.1 with the petitioner No.2. Similar is the stand of petitioner No.1 in her statement recorded on 09.12.2018, wherein she expressed her willingness to marry petitioner No.2 with her own sweet will.

A perusal of the petition reveals that the said statements recorded on Sheetal Gawri 2019.04.06 12:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh 09.12.2018 have been concealed. Even in the statement of girl (petitioner No.1)

CRM-M-55694-2018 (O & M) -2recorded on 09.12.2018, she has not indicated towards existence of any threat. A perusal of the petition reveals that the petitioners have claimed to be in relationship with each other for the last two years. There is no danger to the couple at the hands of the relatives of petitioner No.2, however, the apprehension was from the relatives of petitioner No.1. Neither there is any source of threat expressed nor any mode of threat indicated in the petition. The contents of the petition do not inspire confidence. Resultantly, no ground is made out to invoke inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

Dismissed.

28.02.2019 (MANOJ BAJAJ) sheetal JUDGE Whether Speaking/Reasoned:

Yes/No Whether Reportable :

Yes/No Sheetal Gawri 2019.04.06 12:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh