CRM No. M 37736 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH -- CRM No. M 37736 of 2010 Date of decision: 22.12.2010 Chetna Jain and another ........ Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and others .......Respondent(s) Coram: Hon'ble Ms Justice Nirmaljit Kaur -.- Present: Mr. Amit Dhawan, Advocate for the petitioners Mr. Munish Kumar, AAG, Punjab for the respondent State Mr. Rahul Bhargawa, Advocate for respondents No. 6 and 7 -.- 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) This is a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for issuance of directions to respondents No. 1 to 5 to provide protection to the petitioners so as to safeguard their life and liberty from respondent Nos. 6 and 7 as the petitioners have solemnized marriage on 15.12.2010 against the wishes of the parents of petitioner No.1. Petitioners are present in Court. Mr. Rahul Bhargwa, Advocate appeared on behalf of respondents No. 6 and 7. Respondent No. 6 is also present in court today. CRM No. M 37736 of 2010 2 Initially, respondent No. 6 wanted to meet his daughter, but on seeing her attitude, he does not want to meet her any more and filed his affidavit. In his affidavit, he undertakes that he will not interfere in the matrimonial life of the petitioners. In view of the said affidavit, no further order is called for. However, in case of any threat perceptions, the petitioners shall at liberty to approach the Senior Superintendent of Police, Muktsar, who shall look into the matter and take appropriate measures, if need be. Respondent No. 6 who is present in Court, has also expressed his apprehension and stated that he apprehends harassment at the hands of the petitioners. Learned counsel for the petitioners states that he has instructions to state that the petitioners shall not harass respondents No. 6 and 7 in any manner whatsoever. In view of the statement made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for respondent No. 6 as well as affidavit filed by respondent No. 6, the present petition is disposed of as having been rendered infructuous. (Nirmaljit Kaur) Judge 22.12.2010 mohan