This petition for protection was dismissed as infructuous because the court was satisfied that the couple were major and had married of their own free will, rendering the threat to life and liberty baseless.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
#1#
Crl.M.No.17057-M of 2010
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND
HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CRL.M.NO.17057-M of 2010 (O&M)
DATE OF ORDER: 22.7.2010
Rishipal Singh and another
.....Petitioners
vs.
State of Haryana and others
....Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH
Present: Mr. Maharaj Kumar, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr. M.S. Sindhu, Addl.A.G, Haryana
for respondent Nos.1 to 3.
JASWANT SINGH, J (ORAL)
Crl.M.No.30585 of 2010
Application is allowed as prayed for.
Crl.M.No.17057-M of 2010
Prayer is for grant of protection as the petitioners-couple, who claim themselves to be major, had performed their marriage against the wishes of parents of the wife-petitioner No.2.
On the last date of hearing, it was pointed out that an FIR No.111 dated 18.5.2010 under Sections 363/366 IPC had been registered with Police Station Pundri against petitioner No.1-husband on the allegations that petitioner No.2 was a minor.
Accordingly, SHO of Police Station, Pundri was directed to be
#2#
Crl.M.No.17057-M of 2010
present in court.
At the time of hearing today, learned state counsel, on instructions from ASI Subhash Chander, P.S. Pundri, District Kaithal and ASI Joga Singh, P.S. Sadar Karnal, states that the statements of the husband and wife have been recorded and proof of their being major has been collected by the Investigating Officer of Police Station, Pundri. They are satisfied that she has married of her own sweet will and is also major whereas as per the statements of the parties concerned, there is no threat to the life and liberty of the petitioners.
In view of the aforesaid facts, this petition is rendered
infructuous.
Dismissed as having been rendered infructuous.
July 22, 2010 ( JASWANT SINGH ) manoj JUDGE
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petition for protection is maintainable when the court satisfies that both parties are major and married of their own will.
Whether an FIR alleging the wife was a minor renders the protection petition infructuous upon police verification.
Rishipal Singh
wife-petitioner
State of Haryana
Jaswant Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
