Crl. Misc. No. M-12946 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Case No. : Crl. Misc. No. M-12946 of 2011 Date of Decision : July 20, 2011 Shilpa Rani .... Petitioner Vs. State of Punjab and others .... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE L. N. MITTAL * * * Present : Ms. Anupam Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. * * * L. N. MITTAL, J. (Oral) : Shilpa Rani has filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short – Cr.P.C.). It is alleged that the petitioner voluntarily got married with one Amandeep against the wishes of her parents. Apprehending danger to their lives, the petitioner and her husband sought protection of their lives and liberty from this Court by filing petition against petitioner's parents. The said petition was disposed of vide order dated 20.12.2010 (Annexure P-2) with direction to Senior Superintendent of Police to look into the grievances of the petitioners and to take appropriate measures in accordance with law, if found necessary. Crl. Misc. No. M-12946 of 2011 2 Pursuant thereto, petitioner's father Baldev Raj as well as Balbir Chand – father of petitioner's husband furnished affidavits dated 27.12.2010 (Annexures P-3 and P-4 respectively) approving the marriage of petitioner with Amandeep. Pursuant thereto, the petitioner went to her parental home to be sent back to matrimonial home after 15 days. However, the petitioner was not so sent back and thereupon, petitioner's husband got registered FIR No.15 dated 01.02.2011 under Section 344 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code regarding alleged wrongful confinement of the petitioner by her parents etc. In the aforesaid FIR, statement Annexure P-5 of the petitioner under Section 164 Cr.P.C. was recorded by learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate (SDJM), Jalalabad. In the instant petition, the petitioner has alleged that she made statement Annexure P-5 under the undue influence and force of her parents and relatives. The petitioner wants to retract from the said statement Annexure P-5 on this ground. The petitioner has accordingly sought direction to the official respondents to cancel the said statement Annexure P-5. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the case file. The instant petition appears to be completely misconceived. The petitioner has stated that she had made the statement Annexure P-5 before SDJM, Jalalabad, although the petitioner has alleged that she made Crl. Misc. No. M-12946 of 2011 3 the said statement under the influence and pressure of her parents/relatives. However, the petitioner may approach the Illaqa Magistrate for appropriate relief in accordance with law at appropriate stage of the case i.e. when final report of investigation is submitted by the police in the FIR or at some other stage, as permissible under the law. No such relief can be granted in the instant petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., as sought by the petitioner. The petition is accordingly dismissed, subject to observations in the preceding paragraph. July 20, 2011 ( L. N. MITTAL ) monika JUDGE