Crl. Misc. No. M-36352 of 2010 (1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-36352 of 2010 DATE OF DECISION: 19.05.2011 Makha and another ..........Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and others ..........Respondents BEFORE:- HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY Present:- Mohd. Salim, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Gaurav Garg Dhuriwala, AAG, Punjab. **** DAYA CHAUDHARY, J. The present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed on behalf of Makha and Zakir Hussain for issuing directions to respondents No. 1 to 3 to provide protection to their lives and liberty from the hands of respondents No.4 to 9, as they have solemnized their marriage contrary to their wishes. Notice of motion was issued on 10.12.2010 and while issuing notice of motion, following contention of learned counsel for the petitioners was recorded:- “Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are apprehending threats at the instance of respondents No.4 to 9 and they are getting threats for dissolution of their marriage. The cause of dispute is that respondent No.5 has granted Talak to sister of petitioner No.2 Crl. Misc. No. M-36352 of 2010 (2) as marriage of sister of petitioner No.2 was solemnized on the same day when marriage of petitioners No.1 and 2 solemnized and even a child was born in the year 2007. The petitioners made representation to respondents No.2 and 3 but no action has been taken by the police.” In response thereto, reply on behalf of the respondent-State has already been filed and the same is taken on record. Learned counsel for the respondent-State on the basis of reply as well as on instructions from HC Gorakh Nath submits that the statements of both the petitioners were recorded, wherein, petitioner No.1 has stated that now neither any apprehension of danger from the private respondents is there nor any protection is required. Even in the reply, it has been mentioned that petitioner No.1 is living freely with her husband along with her daughter. Learned counsel for the petitioners also submits that now no threat is there to the petitioners and they are leading their happy married life and a child is also there from the said wedlock and now no police protection is required. In view of the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the present petition has become infructuous and is dismissed as such. May 19, 2011 (DAYA CHAUDHARY) pooja JUDGE