CRM-M-35454-2011 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-35454-2011 (O&M) Date of Decision:26.11.2011 Jai Parkash …Petitioner Versus State of Haryana …Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN Present: Mr. Ashit Malik, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Vikas Malik, AAG, Haryana. ***** RAKESH KUMAR JAIN, J (ORAL) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has no objection to the order dated 22.11.2011 passed by the learned Court below, but it is submitted that perhaps keeping the petitioner handcuffed during the performance of marriage would be quite embarrassing for him being the father of the girl. He further submits that one day for this purpose will not be sufficient as he has to wind up the marriage and to see off the guests, therefore, he prays for two more days in the same fashion as has been granted by the learned Court below. Learned State Counsel submits that the petitioner will not be handcuffed, but there would be adequate police arrangements so that he may not run away. He also submits that the same arrangement could be made for another two days after the marriage but that shall be in terms of the order dated 22.11.2011 passed by the learned Court below. After hearing both the learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the facts and circumstances of this case, the present petition is disposed of with a direction that the order 22.11.2011 of the learned Court below shall remain as it is with two modifications viz. i) that the petitioner shall not be kept handcuffed during the ceremony of marriage (3 days); and ii) the liberty which has been granted by the learned [ 1 ] CRM-M-35454-2011 (O&M) Court below shall also continue for another two days, i.e. 28.11.2011 and 29.11.2011. The other directions given in the order dated 22.11.2011 shall also be followed by the police as well as petitioner meticulously. A copy of this order be given to the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as to the learned State Counsel under signatures of the Bench Secretary attached to this Court for the purpose of compliance. NOVEMBER 26, 2011 (RAKESH KUMAR JAIN) vinod* JUDGE [ 2 ]