IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc.-M No.38154 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision: December 16, 2011 Beenu Rani & another ...Petitioners Versus State of Haryana & others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present: Mr.Ashok K.Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioners. ***** RANJIT SINGH, J. States that it is an inter-caste marriage. There is a potential of threat to the life and liberty of the petitioners. Though no proper proof of age of petitioner No.2 is given except affidavit, yet having regad to the fact that it is an inter-caste marriage, the petition is disposed of with a direction to the Superintendent of Police, Jind to look into the complaint of the petitioners and in case he finds that there is any threat to their life and liberty, he will take appropriate action on the said complaint. Superintendent of Police, Jind would be at liberty to ask the petitioners to reimburse the cost of protection in case it is required to be provided to the petitioners. The present order, however, shall not be deemed to be proof qua the factum/validity of their matrimonial alliance. December 16, 2011 ( RANJIT SINGH ) ramesh JUDGE