IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-22309 of 2010 Date of decision : 4.8.2010 Raj Kaur and another …. Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and Others ….. Respondents Present : Mr. H.S. Rakhra, Advocate for the petitioners. *** S.S. SARON, J. The petitioners are a newly married couple. They left their respective homes on 1.8.2010 and solemnized their marriage amongst themselves on 2.8.2010 at Sri Nirankari Darbar (Rawalpindi), Sector 21-B, Chandigarh. The marriage certificate (Annexure P3) issued by Sri Nirankari Darbar (Rawalpindi) and the photographs (Annexure P4) of the marriage have been placed on record. On account of the marriage that has been solemnized by the petitioners amongst themselves on 2.8.2010, they apprehend danger to their life and liberty from respondents No.4 to 8 who are the relatives of petitioner No.1. In fact the paternal uncles (chacha) of petitioner No.1 i.e. Nanak Chand, Darshan Singh and Gurdev Singh (respondents No.5 to 7) are residing in village Rajgarh Kube, Tehsil Talwandi Sabo, District Bathinda which is the village of petitioner No.2. Therefore, the petitioners are not able to go their matrimonial home in village Rajgarh Kube. The petitioners have also submitted a Crl. Misc. No. M-22309 of 2010 [2] representation dated 2.8.2010 (Annexure P5) to the Senior Superintendent of Police, Bathinda (respondent No.2) for protecting their life and liberty. However, despite the said representation, the threat to them persists. Therefore, they have filed the present petition. The petitioners, it is stated, are major. The date of birth of petitioner No.1 as per her matriculation certificate (Annexure P2) is 7.6.1988 and that of petitioner No.2 as per his matriculation certificate (Annexure P1) is 19.7.1988. Therefore, both the petitioners are major. The averments as made in the petition are supported by an affidavit of Raj Kaur (petitioner No.1). 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 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 August 4, 2010 amit