IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-35921 of 2010 Date of decision : 07.12.2010 Gurpreet Kaur and another …. Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and Others ….. Respondents Present : Mr. Munish Yadav, Advocate for the petitioners. *** S.S. SARON, J. The petitioners on their own solemnized their marriage amongst themselves. The marriage was solemnized at Pracheen Gugga Mari Ram Krishan Mandir, Sector 19-D, Chandigarh on 03.12.2010. The Pandit of the said Mandir performed the marriage as per Hindu rites and ceremonies. The marriage certificate dated 03.12.2010 (Annexure P5) issued by the Pandit of Pracheen Gugga Mari Ram Krishan Mandir, Sector 19-D, Chandigarh and the photographs (Annexure P6) taken at the time of marriage have been placed on record. On account of the marriage that has been solemnized the petitioners apprehend danger to their life and liberty from respondents No.5 and 6 who are the parents of petitioner No.1. The petitioners also submitted an application dated 03.12.2010 (Annexure P7) to the Senior Superintendent of Police, Bathinda (respondent No.2) for protecting their life and liberty which is in danger from the parents (respondents No.5 and 6) of petitioner No.1. Despite the said application, the threat to them Crl. Misc. No. M-35921 of 2010 [2] persists. As such, they have filed the present petition. It is stated that both the petitioners are major. The date of birth of petitioner No.1 as per her middle standard examination certificate (Annexure P1) issued by the Punjab School Education Board is 15.8.1988 and that of petitioner NO.2 as per his middle standard examination certificate (Annexure P2) issued by the aforesaid Board is 22.9.1988. The averments made in the petition are supported by affidavit of Gurpreet Kaur (petitioner No.1). It is stated by Naveen Kumar (petitioner No.2) that he is working as a Diesel Supervisor in Shim Info Company Private Limited. 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. It is also stated by the petitioners that they are not earlier married. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, the criminal miscellaneous petition is disposed of with a direction to respondents No.2 to 4 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 07, 2010 amit