Crl. Misc. No.M-23960 of 2010 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl. Misc. No. M-23960 of 2010 Date of Decision: October 1, 2010 Jule Singh and another …..Petitioners Vs. State of Haryana and others …..Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.S. BEDI. -.- Present:- Mr.Deepak Manchanda, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr.Amit Rana, DAG, Haryana. Mr. Shiv Kumar, Advocate for private respondents. -.- M.M.S. BEDI, J. (ORAL) Petitioners claimed to have attained majority and married against the wishes of their family members. In order to show that petitioner No.1 is major, a forged birth certificate appears to have been produced before this Court. Annexure R-2 is a certificate which exists on the record Crl. Misc. No.M-23960 of 2010 [2] of Municipal Corporation, Delhi. The said certificate has been changed into certificate annexure P-1 by erasing the date of birth and incorporating the date of birth as September 21, 1991. In this context, an FIR under Sections 467, 468, 471 IPC has been registered against petitioner No.2. Besides this, no marriage certificate has been placed on record. In the absence of any authentic material indicating that the petitioners are married or any document establishing the girl being major, entertaining this petition would tentamount to perpetuating illegality and immorality. So far as petitioner No.1 is concerned, she is present in the court and claimed that she does not want to live with her parents. Though there is no documentary evidence indicating that she is married to petitioner No.2 yet she insists that she wants to stay with petitioner No.2. Parents of petitioner No.1 are present in the Court. They have insisted that petitioner No.1 being minor they being natural guardians, the custody of petitioner No.2 should be ordered to be entrusted to them. Attempt made for reconciliation is failed. Since a number of disputed questions of fact regarding the age and factum of marriage are involved in this case, the exercise of posers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. will not be in the interest of justice. Striking a balance between the rights of petitioner No.1 granted to her under Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the right of the natural guardian to retain her custody and taking into consideration the fraud which has been tried to be played with this Court, petition is disposed of with the following directions:- Crl. Misc. No.M-23960 of 2010 [3] i) it will be open to respondents No.1 to 4 to take necessary action in accordance with law in FIR No. 292 dated July 10, 2010 registered at Police Station Sarai Khawaja, Faridabad; ii) parents of petitioner No.1 would be entitled to seek the custody of petitioner No.1 by adopting due procedure of law. It is made clear that petitioner No.1 cannot be forcibly taken in custody by the officials respondents or the private respondents; iii) the petitioners would be entitled to adopt legal means to protect their life and liberty. Nothing mentioned in the order will prevent the parties to amicably resolve the dispute. This order will not curtail the right of petitioner No.1 to return to her parents’ house at any occasion. October 1, 2010 (M.M.S.BEDI) sanjay JUDGE