IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Criminal Miscellaneous No. M-22911 of 2011 (O & M) Date of Decision: August 24, 2011 Harjinder Kaur & another .....PETITIONER(S) VERSUS State of Punjab & others .....RESPONDENT(S) . . . CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: - Mr. Navjot Singh, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. Manoj Bajaj, Additional Advocate General, Punjab. Mr. D.K. Bhatti, Advocate, for respondent Nos.4 to 9. . . . AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral) 1. Petitioners, Harjinder Kaur and Karamjit Singh, have approached this Court with the plea that they have attained the age of majority and got married. Evidence in regard to age has been placed on record. It has further been brought out that petitioner No.2 belongs to Scheduled Caste category and therefore, the marriage is opposed by relatives of petitioner No.1, viz. respondent Nos.4 to 9. 2. It has been pleaded that petitioners got married in a Crl. Misc. No. M-22911 of 2011 [2] Gurudwara at Jagraon. Photographs have been placed on record, collectively, as Annexure P-3. 3. When the case came up for hearing on 10.8.2011, learned counsel for the petitioners informed the Court that petitioners were in the Court to put in appearance, however, have been picked up by relatives of petitioner No.1. 4. Today, petitioner No.1, Harjinder Kaur, has put in appearance and states that it was under duress that her signatures were taken on the petition and her photographs were taken. She did not willingly come with petitioner No.2. 5. Mr. Gian Singh, Assistant Sub Inspector, Police Station, Sultanpur, District Kapurthala, is present in Court and states that petitioner No.1, Harjinder Kaur, gave a statement which prima facie indicated commission of a cognizable offence. FIR has been lodged on 19.8.2011 bearing No.98, under Sections 363, 366, 376, 506, 120-B IPC, with Police Station, Sultanpur, District Kapurthala, and investigation would be carried out. 6. In view of the developments, as recorded above, this petition is disposed of, with directions to the investigating agency to also investigate the facts and circumstances under which certificate of marriage has been taken; photographs indicating marriage of the petitioners have been clicked; and the circumstances under which the petition was filed. (AJAI LAMBA) August 24, 2011 JUDGE avin Crl. Misc. No. M-22911 of 2011 [3] 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?