IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM No.33450 of 2010 and CRM No. M-18579 of 2010 Date of decision: July 6, 2010 Babita Rani and another …. Petitioners Versus State of Haryana and Others ….. Respondents Present: Mr. Abhishek Yadav, Advocate for the petitioners. *** S.S. SARON, J. CRM No.33450 of 2010 The affidavit of Sahil (Annexure P2) attached with the Crl. Misc. application is taken on record subject to just exceptions. Crl. Misc. stands disposed of. CRM No. M-18579 of 2010 The petitioners are a newly married couple. The present petition has been filed by them for directing respondents No.2 and 3 to protect their life and liberty from respondents No.4 to 7 who are the father and maternal uncles respectively of petitioner No.1. The petitioners, it is stated, are major and they have sufficient understanding to tackle their problems. The date of birth of petitioner No.1 CRM No.33450 of 2010 and [2] CRM No. M-18579 of 2010 as per her secondary examination certificate (Annexure P1) issued by the Board of School Education, Haryana is 10.1.1991. The date of birth of petitioner No.2 as per his affidavit dated 30.6.2010, the original of which has been taken on record today is 19.2.1989. The petitioners belong to the same caste. Petitioner No.1 expressed her desire for marriage with petitioner No.2 before her father (respondent No.4). However, her father (respondent No.4) got enraged and was not agreeable for the marriage. Moreover, respondents No.4 to 7 threatened the petitioners that if they took any step against their wishes, they would face dire consequences. Due to fear of respondents No.4 to 7, the petitioners left their respective homes and decided to solemnize their marriage amongst themselves. The petitioners accordingly on 30.6.2010 solemnized their marriage amongst themselves at Arya Samaj Samiti, Sector 32-C, Chandigarh according to Hindu rites and ceremonies. The marriage certificate (Annexure P3) issued by Arya Samaj Samiti and the photographs (Annexure P4) of the marriage have been placed on record. After the marriage, a friend of petitioner No.2 informed that respondents No.4 to 7 were searching for them as they had committed heinous crime. It is submitted that in fact the petitioners are legally married husband and wife and they have a right to live with each other. However, respondents No.4 to 7 are interfering and disturbing the peaceful married life of the petitioners in collusion with local administration. The petitioners had brought the matter to the notice of the concerned SHO, but no action has been taken. The petitioners then submitted a representation dated 30.6.2010 (Annexure P5) to the Superintendent of Police, Sirsa (respondent No.2). Despite the said representation, the threat to the petitioners persists. CRM No.33450 of 2010 and [3] CRM No. M-18579 of 2010 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 July 6, 2010 amit