IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-14574 of 2010 Date of decision : 17.5.2010 Amandeep Kaur and another …. Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and Others ….. Respondents Present : Mr. Nakul Sharma, Advocate for the petitioners. *** S.S. SARON, J. The petitioners are a newly married couple. The present petition has been filed for directing respondents No.2 and 3 to protect their life and liberty and that of the family members of petitioner No.2 by providing them police protection and further not to harass them illegally at the behest of respondents No.4 to 6 who are the father and brothers respectively of petitioner No.1. Both the petitioners, it is stated, are major. The date of birth of petitioner No.1 as per her matriculation certificate (Annexure P1) issued by the Punjab School Education Board is 24.11.1986 and that of petitioner No.2 as per his ISCE certificate (Annexure P2) is 10.12.1982. Petitioner No.2 has a good source of income as he is working in NECTAR Lifescience Limited, Dera Bassi, Punjab and is earning a handsome salary on the basis of which he can maintain his wife and family. A copy of the identity card (Annexure P2) of petitioner No.2 issued by the NECTAR Lifescience Limited, village Crl. Misc. No. M-14574 of 2010 [2] Saidpur, Tehsil Dera Bassi, Distt. Mohali has been placed on record. The petitioners had a liking for each other for the last two years. Therefore, they wanted to solemnize their marriage amongst themselves. Petitioner No.1 informed her parents of her liking of petitioner No.2 and of her intention to marry him. However, respondents No.4 to 6 who are the father and brothers respectively of petitioner No.1 warned her from taking any step in this regard as it would lead to alarming consequences. Besides, they would not allow the marriage. The parents of petitioner No.1 were in fact interested to marry her to a person of their choice and from their own caste. Respondents No.4 to 6 were against the marriage, therefore, left with no option, the petitioners decided to solemnize their marriage on their own. The petitioners have solemnized their marriage amongst themselves on 13.5.2010 at Arya Samaj Mandir, Sector 22-A, Chandigarh. The marriage ceremony was performed by Pandit Dhrinder Shastri as per Hindu rites. Copy of the marriage certificate (Annexure P4) issued by Pandit Dhrinder Shastri, Arya Samaj Mandir, Sector-22A, Chandigarh and photographs (Annexure P5) of the marriage have been placed on record. After the marriage, the petitioners came to the house of petitioner No.2. Then respondents No.4 to 6 came there and abused the petitioners and created an unruly scene. They threatened to eliminate the petitioners and the family members of petitioner No.2. Therefore, the petitioners have left their house and are living at various places and family members of petitioner No.1 are hunting them. The family of petitioner No.1 has good influence with police officials and the police is also hunting for them. Petitioner No.1 has also submitted a representation dated Crl. Misc. No. M-14574 of 2010 [3] 13.5.2010 (Annexure P6) to the SHO, Police Station Rampura Phool, District Bathinda (respondent No.3) with copy to SSP, Bathinda (respondent No.2) informing them that she has solemnized her marriage with petitioner No.2 and that the marriage was performed without any pressure or undue influence. It is requested that in case her parents lodge any police complaint against her husband or family of her in-laws then no action be taken. Despite, the said representation (Annexure P6), the threat to the petitioners persists. 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. 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 May 17, 2010 amit