← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRWP/2668/2019disposed of

Santa And ANR v. State Of Haryana And Others

2019-12-31Mr. Justice Suvir Sehgal2 pages

CRWP No.2668 of 2019 {1}

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRWP No.2668 of 2019 Date of decision:31.12.2019 Santa and another ... Petitioners Vs.

State of Haryana and others ... Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUVIR SEHGAL Present:- Mr. Saransh Sabharwal, Advocate for the petitioners.

SUVIR SEHGAL J. (Oral) Santa daughter of Dharampal (petitioner No.1) claims to be 18 years and Rakesh son of Krishan Chand (petitioner No.2) claims to be 20 years of age. They have pleaded that they have married against the wishes of respondents No.5 to 8 and seek protection to their life and liberty. They apprehend danger from respondents No.5 to 8. They have placed on record photographs, Annexure P-4, claiming that they married on 26.12.2019, but the Mandir did not issue any Marriage Certificate. The petitioners have submitted a representation dated 26.12.2019, Annexure P-5 to respondents No.2 to 4.

Learned counsel for the petitioners has relied upon the judgment of this Court passed by a Division Bench in LPA No.385 of 2016 titled as Elaichi and another Vs. State of Punjab and others, decided on 16.05.2016 and a judgment of Co-ordinate Bench of this Court passed in CWP No.17069 of 2019 titled as Kawaljeet Kaur and another Vs. State SAVITA KADIAN 2019.12.31 14:39 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh

CRWP No.2668 of 2019 {2} of Punjab and others, decided on 24.06.2019 to submit that even though boy was not of marriageable age, this Court had entertained their petitions for protection of their life and liberty.

Without entering upon an exercise to evaluate the evidentiary value of the documents placed on the file, I dispose of the petition with directions to respondents No.2 to 4 to decide the representation of the petitioners, Annexure P-5 and grant them protection, if any threat to their life and liberty is perceived.

It is clarified that this order shall not be treated as a stamp of this Court for the marriage of the petitioners. (SUVIR SEHGAL) JUDGE December 31, 2019 savita Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No SAVITA KADIAN 2019.12.31 14:39 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh