In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh ...... Criminal Misc. No.M-28351 of 2010 ..... Date of decision:24.9.2010 Saloni and another .....Petitioners v. State of Punjab and others .....Respondents .... Present: Mr. Ravi Kant, Advocate for the petitioners. ..... S.S. Saron, J. The petitioners are a newly married couple. They have on their own solemnized their marriage amongst themselves on 28.8.2010 at Maharishi Valmiki Mandir, Sector 24-C, Chandigarh as per Hindu rites and ceremonies. The marriage certificate (Annexure-P.3) issued by the Swayamvar Sanskar Foundation (Regd. No.4041), Sector 30-B, Chandigarh and photographs (Annexure-P.4) have been placed on record. On account of the marriage that has been solemnized the petitioners apprehend danger to their life and liberty from respondents No.3 and 4. Respondent No.3- Hayat Singh is father of petitioner No.2-Narendra Singh and respondent No.4 -Krishan Lal is father of petitioner No.1-Saloni. The petitioners, therefore, submitted an application dated 30.8.2010 (Annexure-P.5) to the Senior Superintendent of Police, Jalandhar (respondent No.2) requesting him to provide protection to the petitioners. Despite, the said application, it is submitted that the threat to the petitioners persists, therefore, they have filed the present petition. It is submitted that both the petitioners are major. The date of birth of petitioner No.1 as per her Middle standard examination certificate Cr. Misc. No.M-28351 of 2010 [2] (Annexure-P.1) issued by the Punjab School Education Board is 12.11.1981 and that of petitioner No.2 as per his All India Secondary School examination certificate (Annexure-P.2) issued by the Central Board of Secondary Education is 5.5.1983. The averments made in the petition are supported by affidavit of petitioner No.1. 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. It is submitted by both the petitioners that they were not earlier married. In the afore-noticed facts and circumstances, the present criminal miscellaneous petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2 that in case the petitioners approach him 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. September 24, 2010. (S.S. Saron) Judge *hsp*