IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-35788 of 2010 Date of decision : 06.12.2010 Preety Kaura and another …. Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and others ….. Respondents Present : Mr. M.K. Garg, Advocate for the petitioners. *** S.S. SARON, J. The petitioners had a liking for each other and therefore, they on their own solemnized their marriage amongst themselves at Maharishi Balmiki Mandir, Sector-24- C, Chandigarh on 02.12.2010 according to Hindu rites and ceremonies. Copy of the marriage certificate (Annexure P3) issued by the Swayamvar Sanskar Foundation, U.T., Chandigarh regarding marriage that was solemnized at Maharishi Balmiki Mandir, Sector-24-C, Chandigarh and the photographs (Annexure P4) taken at the time of marriage have been placed on record. The marriage that has been solemnized is not to the liking of the parents (respondents No.4 and 5) of petitioner No.1. Therefore, petitioner No.1 submitted an application (Annexure P5) dated 2.12.2010 to the Senior Superintendent of Police, Faridkot (respondent No.2) seeking protection of her life and liberty as also that of Crl. Misc. No. M-35788 of 2010 [2] her husband (petitioner No.2) on account of the marriage that they have solemnized amongst themselves. Despite the said representation, the threat to them persists. It is submitted that both the petitioners are major. The date of birth of petitioner No.1 as per her matriculation certificate (Annexure P1) issued by the Punjab School Education Board is 31.8.1985 and that of petitioner No.2 as per his matriculation certificate (Annexure P2) issued by the aforesaid Board is 25.10.1983. The averments made in the petition are supported by an affidavit of Preety Kaura (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. She is happy with her marriage. It is also stated by the petitioners that they were not earlier married. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, the 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 would be looked into by them independently and in accordance with law. (S.S. SARON) JUDGE December 06, 2010 amit