WPCRL No.360 of 2011 Hon’ble Tarun Agarwala, J. Hon’ble V.K. Bist, J. Smt. Prabha Naithani, learned counsel for the petitioners. Shri Amit Bhatt, learned A.G.A. for the State/respondent nos.1 to 3. Shri T.A. Khan, learned counsel for the respondent nos.4, 5 & 7. The petitioners have filed the present writ petition praying that there is an eminent danger to their life and liberty from respondent no.4, who is the father of the girl (petitioner no.2) and consequently have approached this Court seeking protection of their life and liberty. The petitioners alleged that they are major and have married without any undue pressure on 11.10.2010, which was not being liked by the father of the petitioner no.2. It was also alleged that respondent no.4, namely, the father of the petitioner no.2 had filed a Habeas Corpus Petition no.16 of 2011, which was dismissed by the judgment dated 1st August, 2011, wherein the petitioner no.2 appeared and stated before the Court that she is living with respondent no.4 after getting married to petitioner no.1 on her own volition. The petitioner no.2 also submitted that she does not wish to go back to her parental house. The learned counsel for the respondent no.4 admitted that petitioner no.2 is major but only urged that the alleged NIKAHNAMA is a forged document. Considering the aforesaid facts, the Court is of the opinion that two adults are living together on their own volition and consequently respondent no.4 cannot interfere in their married life. Consequently, the writ petition is disposed of commanding the respondent nos.2 & 3 not to harass them in their personal life and liberty. (V.K. Bist, J.) (Tarun Agarwala, J.) 02.08.2011 02.08.2011 Arpan