Saddam Hussain And ANR v. State Of Haryana And ORS

-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH *** Decided on: 21st February, 2022 Saddam Hussaim and another Petitioners

Versus

State of Haryana and others Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN

Present:

None for the petitioners.

Ms. Geeta Sharma, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana. **** AVNEESH JHINGAN, J (Oral):

[1] Due to COVID-19 situation, the Court is convened through video conference.

[2] The petitioners had married against wishes of their parents and filed this petition seeking directions to protect their life and liberty from the hands of their family members.

[3] Notice of motion was issued on 20th December, 2019. Reply dated 24th February, 2020 by way of affidavit of Mr. Virender Singh, HPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Ferozepur Jhirak, District Nuh was filed annexing the statements of petitioners and respondents No. 5 to 7, same are quoted below:- "Statement of petitioner No. 1:

It is stated that I am resident of the aforesaid address and

-2doing labour work. I and Halima d/o Sher Mohd. Meo r/o Ladmaki, P.S. Hathin, have solemnized marriage in Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh now we are residing as wife and husband in village Multhan. We have no any danger frm any person.

Sd/- Saddam Hussain Statement of petitioner No. 2:

I am agree with the aforesaid statement and I and Saddam are residing as wife and husband.

RTI Halima Statement of respondent No. 7:

It is stated that I am resident of the aforesaid address and I am driver. The wife of his son Sarukh Halima has solemnized marriage with Saddam s/o Ishak Meo r/o Multhan for which I have no objection earlier or even on today. I will remain abide by the law. I have statement which is correct. Jamil Statement of respondent No. 6:

I am agree with the aforesaid statement and will remain abide by law.

Sd/- Saruklh s/o Jamil Statement of respondent No.5:

It is stated that I am resident of the aforesaid address and am domestic wife and Halima is my daughter and she is major. I have no objection on his marriage nor I was against for this marriage earlier. She can reside anywhere, I will not create any danger for her and will remain abide by the law I

-3husband Sher Mohd. has died earlier. I have got recorded my statement in the presence of my son Latif, heard, which is correct.

Sd/- RTI Latif s/o Sher Mohd. r/o Ladmaki Basiri [4] None has put in appearance on behalf of learned counsel for the petitioners in spite of two pass overs.

[5] In view of statements annexed, no interference is called for and the petition is disposed of as infructuous. [6] Needless to say that petitioners would always be at liberty to move an application for recalling of this order in case of surviving grievance, if any.

[AVNEESH JHINGAN] JUDGE 21st February, 2022
 

1. Whether speaking/ reasoned :

Yes /No

2. Whether reportable :

Yes /No