IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-29021 of 2010 Date of decision : 30.9.2010 Meenakshi and another …. Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and others ….. Respondents Present : Mr. Deepak Aggarwal, Advocate for the petitioners. *** S.S. SARON, J. The petitioners are a newly married couple. They have on their own solemnized their marriage amongst themselves on 22.9.2010. It is stated by learned counsel for the petitioners on instructions from the petitioners that the marriage was solemnized at the house of a friend of petitioner No.2 namely Rahul Sachdeva, resident of House No.16, Putlighar, Amritsar. The photographs (Annexure P1) taken at the time of marriage have been placed on record. On account of the marriage that has been solemnized, the petitioners apprehend threat to their life and liberty from respondents No.4 and 5 who are the parents of petitioner No.2. The petitioners also submitted a representation dated 25.9.2010 (Annexure P4) to the Commissioner of Police, Amritsar (respondent No.2) seeking protection of their life and liberty. However, despite the said representation, the threat to the petitioners persists. Therefore, they have filed the present petition. It is submitted that the petitioners are major. The date of birth of petitioner No.1 as per her matriculation certificate (Annexure P2) issued by the Punjab School Education Board is 17.7.1983 and that of petitioner No.2 as per his matriculation certificate (Annexure P3) issued by Crl. Misc. No. M-29021 of 2010 [2] the aforesaid board is 10.8.1985. The averments as made in the petition are supported by affidavit of Meenakshi (petitioner No.1). Both the petitioners are present in Court and are identified by their counsel. It is stated by petitioner No.1 that she has solemnized her marriage with petitioner No.2 of her own free will and desire and without any kind of pressure or undue influence. She is happy with her marriage. It is also stated by the petitioners that they were not earlier married. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, the criminal miscellaneous petition is disposed of with a direction to respondents No.2 and 3 that in case the petitioners approach any of them setting out their grievances as have been made in the present petition, the same would be looked into by them independently and in accordance with law. (S.S. SARON) JUDGE September 30, 2010 amit