In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh ...... Criminal Misc. No.M-30348 of 2010 ..... Date of decision:12.10.2010 Mohd. Shahid and another .....Petitioners v. State of Haryana and others .....Respondents .... Present: Mr. S.S. Kaliramna, Advocate for the petitioners. ..... S.S. Saron, J. The petitioners on their own married each other on 13.9.2010 at Jama Masjid Sancholi, Tehsil Sohna, District Gurgaon as per Mohammedan rites. On account of the marriage that has been performed they are facing threat to their life from the parents and other family members of Aisha (petitioner No.2) especially from respondents No.4 and 5, who are the father and father's elder brother (Taaya) of petitioner No.2. The petitioners are continuously receiving threats, to their life and liberty from the family members of petitioner No.2. The petitioners submitted an application (Annexure-P.4) to the SHO, Police Station Sohna, District Gurgaon (respondent No.3) with copy to Commissioner of Police, Gurgaon (respondent No.2) for taking action against Kammu (respondent No.4) and Issak (respondent No.5) and for protecting their life and liberty. Despite the said application, the threat to them persists. Because the petitioners had a liking for each other that they decided to perform their marriage amongst themselves. Therefore, the Nikah was performed in the Jama Masjid, Cr. Misc. No.M-30348 of 2010 [2] Sancholi, Tehsil Sohna, District Gurgaon against the wishes of respondents No.4 and 5. Photostat copy of the Nikahnama has been filed in Court which is taken on record. It is submitted that both the petitioners are major. The petitioner No.1 is 23 years of age and petitioner No.2 is 20 years of age. The date of birth of petitioner No.1, it is stated, is 15.11.1987 and that of petitioner No.2, it is stated, is 10.4.1990. The petitioners have filed their affidavits (Annexures-P.1 And P.2) with regard to their respective dates of birth. Both the petitioners are present in Court and are identified by their counsel. It is stated by petitioner No.2 that she has solemnized her marriage with petitioner No.1 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 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 same shall be duly considered and looked into by them independently and in accordance with law. October 12, 2010. (S.S. Saron) Judge *hsp*