1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr.WP No.26 of 2011. Decided on:December 12, 2011. 1. Rohit Sharma S/O Sh.C.L.Sharma. 2. Ripanshi W/O Sh.Rohit Sharma. Both residents of Kailash Nagar (Nakroh),Teh.Amb, Distt.Una, H.P. …..Petitioners. VERSUS 1. State of Himachal Pradesh through Secretary (Home) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh, Shimla-2. State of H.P. 2. Director General of Police, Himachal Pradesh, Shimla. 3. Superintendent of Police, Una, District Una, H.P. 4. Deputy Superintendent of Police, Amb, District Una, H.P. 5. S.H.O. Police Station, Amb, District Una. 6. Chandan Lal Sharma S/O Shri Mulakh Ram. 7. Saneh Lata W/O Sh. Chandan Lal Sharma. 8. Anand Sharma S/O Shri Mulakh Raj.] 9. Neelam Sharma W/O Sh.Anand Sharma. 10. Rahul Sharma S/O Sh.Anand Sharma. All residents of Kailash Nagar (Nakroh), Tehsil Amb, District Una, H.P. …..Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr.Justice R.B.Misra, Judge. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, Judge. 2 For the petitionerw: Mr.Anup Rattan, Advocate. For respondents : Mr.R.K.Sharma, Sr.Addl. Advocate No.1 to 5 General with Mr.Rajinder Dogra, Additional Advocate General. For respondents Mr.S.S.Mittal, Senior Avocate with No.6 to 10. Mr.Surinder P.Sharma, Advocate. R.B.Misra, Judge (oral) In reference to our order dated 7.12.2011, respondent No.6, Sh.Chandan Lal Sharma, Mrs. Saneh Lata, respondent No.7, Mr.Anand Sharma, respondent No.8, Mrs.Neelam Sharma, respondent No.9 and Mr.Rahul Sharma, respondent No.10 are present in the Court. Sh.Chandan Lal Sharma had undertaken on 7.12.2011 to produce Sh.Rohit Sharma before this court, accordingly Rohit Sharma is present in the Court today. In the like manner Ms.Ripanshi, wife of Sh.Rohit Sharma, petitioner No.2 is also present before us. It has been stated by Mr.Chandan Lal Sharma that he has filed his affidavit dated 5.12.2011 and he is well-wisher of his son and daughter-in-law and he shall not directly or indirectly interfere in the marital life of the petitioners. In the same manner, Mrs.Sneh Lata, Anand Sharma, Neelam Sharma and Rahul Sharma, have also stated that they will not directly or indirectly interfere in the peaceful marital life of the petitioners. Whereas, Mr.Raj Kumar, the father of Ms.Ripanshi, present in the Court is not comfortable with the marriage of the petitioner and seems not happy the way Rohit Sharma and Ripanshi 3 are carrying with their marital life. However, his opinion shall have no value unless he directly or indirectly influences or interferes in the matrimonial life of Sh.Rohit Sharma and Ms.Ripanshi. In the facts and circumstances, the present criminal writ petition is disposed of. Any of the allegation against the father, parents and the relatives, with respect to confinement of petitioner Rohit Sharma is dropped. ( R.B.Misra ), J. ( Sanjay Karol ),J. 12th December, 2011 (Purohit)