IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH -- CRM No. M 31455 of 2009 Date of decision: 04, 2009 Sameena and another ........ petitioners Versus State of Haryana .......Respondent(s) Coram: Hon'ble Ms Justice Nirmaljit Kaur -.- Present: Mr. K K Saini, Advocate for the petitioners Mr. Pradeep Virk, DAG, Haryana for respondents No. 1 and 2 Mr. Y K Aggarwal, Advocate for respondent No. 3 -.- 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? 3. Whether the judgement should be reported in the Digest? Nirmaljit Kaur, J. (Oral) Learned State counsel has filed reply on behalf of respondents No. 1 and 2 in court today. The same is taken on record. Mr. Y K Aggarwal, Advocate appearing for respondent No. 3, i.e. father of petitioner No. 1 states that respondent No. 3 has no objection to petitioner No. 1 staying with petitioner No. 2 and he shall not come in the way of the petitioners living together. In view of the statement made by learned counsel for respondent No. 3, no further action is required. Disposed of accordingly. (Nirmaljit Kaur) Judge December 04, 2009 mohan