In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh ...... Criminal Misc.-M No.6356 of 2009 ..... Date of decision:5.3.2009 Savita and another .....Petitioners v. State of Uttarakahand and others .....Respondents .... Present: Ms. Poonam R. Mehta, Advocate for the petitioners. ..... S.S. Saron, J. This petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for directing respondents No.1 to 4 to protect the life and liberty of the petitioners who apprehend danger from respondent No.5 who is the father of petitioner No.1. It is stated that both the petitioners are major. Savita (petitioner No.1), it is stated, is 19 years of age. Learned counsel for the petitioners, on instructions from petitioner No.1 states that her date of birth is 4.9.1989. A reference is made to the identity card (Annexure-P.1) issued by the Election Commission of India on 23.12.2008 in which petitioner No.1 is recorded as 19 years of age as on 1.1.2009. The date of birth of petitioner No.2 as per his Matriculation examination certificate (Annexure-P.2) issued by the Board of School Education, Haryana is 28.2.1987. Therefore, both the petitioners, it is stated are major. They had a liking for each other and, therefore, they have solemnized their marriage amongst themselves on 3.3.2009 as per Hindu rites at Maharishi Balmiki Mandir, Chandigarh which learned counsel for the petitioners states is situated in Section 24, Chandigarh. The photographs (Annexure-P.3) of the solemnization of Cr. Misc.-M No.6356/2009 [2] marriage have been placed on record. In view of the marriage that has been solemnized by the petitioners, they apprehend the danger to their life and liberty from respondent No.5, who is the father of petitioner No.1 and his family. Accordingly, petitioner No.1 submitted an application dated 3.3.2009 (Annexure-P.4) to the SHO, Police Station Sadar, Rishikesh (respondent No.4) with a copy to SSP, Dehradun (respondent No.2). It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that marriage was solemnized at Chandigarh and the petitioners are residing at Yamuna Nagar within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court. Therefore, part of cause of action has accrued to them within the jurisdiction of this Court. 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. Keeping in view the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the present criminal miscellaneous petition is disposed of with the directions to respondents No.2, 3 and 4 that in case the petitioners approach any of them setting out their grievances as have been made in the present petition the same shall be duly considered and looked into by them independently and in accordance with law. Copy of this order be given dasti on payment of fee prescribed for urgent applications. March 5, 2009. (S.S. Saron) Judge *hsp*