IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-36358 of 2009 Date of decision : 22.12.2009 Parwinder Kaur and another …. Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and Others …. Respondents Present: Mr. Manohar Dadwal, Advocate for the petitioners. **** S.S. SARON, J. The petitioners, it is stated, are major. The date of birth of petitioner No.1 as per her matriculation examination certificate (Annexure P1) issued by the Punjab School Education Board is 25.7.1985 and that of petitioner No.2 as per the School Leaving Certificate (Annexure P2) issued by the Government Senior Secondary School, Safdarpur is 25.5.1985. Petitioner No.2, it is stated, is a Mason and earns handsome money. The petitioners had a liking for each other and therefore, decided to solemnize their marriage amongst themselves. However, this was not to the liking of respondents No.4 to 10. Respondent No.4 is the father, respondent No.5 is the mother and respondents No.6 to 8 are the brothers and respondents No.9 and 10 are the cousins/uncle of petitioner No.1 respectively. The petitioners solemnized their marriage amongst themselves at Mahavir Mandir Krishna Colony, Hoshiarpur on 5.12.2009. The photographs (Annexures P3 to P5) regarding Crl. Misc. No. M-36358 of 2009 [2] solemnization of marriage have been placed on record. The petitioners being conscious of the fact that respondents No.4 to 10 were against the marriage submitted an application dated 6.12.2009 (Annexure P6) to the Senior Superintendent of Police, Hoshiarpur (respondent No.2) seeking protection of their life and liberty by providing them security. It is submitted that despite the said application, the threat to the petitioners persists. 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. 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 December 22, 2009 amit