In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh ...... Criminal Misc. No.M-9818 of 2010 ..... Date of decision:1.4.2010 Ranjit and another .....Petitioners v. State of Punjab and others .....Respondents .... Present: Mr. Vipul Dharmani, Advocate for the petitioners. ..... S.S. Saron, J. The petitioners are a newly married couple. They have filed this petition seeking directions to respondents No.1 to 3 to protect their life and liberty and to ensure that they are not harassed by respondents No.4 to 6, who are brothers and maternal uncle respectively of petitioner No.1. The petitioners, it is stated, are major. Petitioner No.1 is 26 years of age and petitioner No.2 is 23 years of age. In terms of the identity card (Annexure-P.1) issued by the Election Commission of India the age of petitioner No.1 on 1.1.2003 is recorded as 19 years. Petitioner No.2 has deposed an affidavit dated 31.3.2010 (Annexure-P.2) in which he has stated that his date of birth is 2.10.1986. The petitioners had a liking for each other and, therefore, decided to solemnize their marriage amongst themselves and live as husband and wife. They disclosed their intention to their respective parents. The parents of petitioner No.2 agreed to the marriage, however, the parents of petitioner No.1 were adamant and refused Cr. Misc. No.M-9818 of 2010 [2] to solemnize her marriage with petitioner No.2. The brothers (respondents No.4 and 5) and maternal uncle (respondent No.6) threatened petitioner No.1 that she would be eliminated. In view of the adamant behaviour of respondents No.4 to 6 the petitioners on their own have solemnized their marriage on 29.3.2010 at a temple of Arya Samaj Samiti, Chandigarh. The photographs (Annexure-P.3) of the ceremony of marriage and the marriage certificate (Annexure-P.4) issued by Arya Samaj Samiti, Chandigarh have been placed on record. Since petitioner No.1 had left her parents and got married with petitioner No.2 the police officials are raiding the house of petitioner No.2 and harassing his parents at the instance of respondents No.4 to 6. The petitioners are hiding themselves at one place or the other to avoid the wrath of the petitioner No.1. The petitioner No.1 also submitted a complaint dated 30.3.2010 (Annexure-P.5) to the SSP, Kapurthala (respondent No.2) requesting that action be taken against the accused persons so that the complainant (petitioner No.1) can go to her in-laws home with her husband and live peacefully. Despite the said application the threat 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. Besides, she is happy with her marriage. In the afore-noticed facts and circumstances, the present 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 Cr. Misc. No.M-9818 of 2010 [3] same shall be duly considered and looked into by them independently and in accordance with law. April 1, 2010. (S.S. Saron) Judge *hsp*