IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl.M. No.26049-M of 2006 Date of Decision: 26.4.2007 Sunil Verma ....Petitioner. Versus State of Punjab and others. ...Respondents. Present:- Mr.S.K.Bawa,Advocate for the petitioner. **** S.S.SARON, J.(ORAL) This petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner praying for issuance of directions to respondents No.1 and 2 to protect the life and liberty of the petitioner from respondents No.4 and 5 and not to harass the petitioner and his family members. It is submitted that the petitioner married Divya Bedi on 5.2.2007 at Chintpurni Mandir, Himachal Pardesh, by Hindu Rites and Ceremony. It is submitted that the marriage of the petitioner with the girl of his choice i.e. Divya Bedi, was not to the liking of respondents No.4 and 5 who are the father and cousin brother of the petitioner. Therefore, they were not happy with the marriage. They infact wanted that the petitioner should marry a girl of their choice so that they could get sufficient dowry. On 20.4.2007 respondents No.4 and 5, approached the SHO, P.S.Dasuya, respondent No.3 for initiating criminal action against the petitioner. The SHO, P.S.Dasuya, visited the house of the petitioner on 21.4.2007 so as to apprehend him. The petitioner, Crl.M. No.26049-M of 2006 -2- however, managed to escape. Later the petitioner came to know that respondents No.4 and 5 had made some false complaint with respondent No.3 on the basis of which respondent No.3 is visiting the house of the petitioner time and again. It is submitted that the petitioner is a major and has married according to his own free will and desire. In the circumstances it is prayed that his life and liberty be protected. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner and perusing the paper book, it may be noticed that the petitioner has not approached the SSP, Hoshiarpur, respondent No.2, with regard to the grievance as has been set out in the present petition. In the circumstances, it would be appropriate if the petitioner in the first instance approaches the SSP Hoshiarpur, respondent No.2 setting out the grievance as has been made in the present petition. Accordingly, the present petition is disposed of with the direction that in case the petitioner approaches respondent No.2, SSP Hoshiarpur, setting out the grievance as made in the present petition, the same would be looked into by respondent No.2 independently and in accordance with law and un-influenced by any observation made herein. (S.S.SARON) April 26,2007 JUDGE Reema