Petitioners sought protection of life and liberty fearing arrest due to marriage solemnized against parental consent. Court directed police to consider protection applications without treating this order as court seal on the marriage.
Direction to Commissioner of Police, Jalandhar to consider application for protection to life and liberty.
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.
In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh
CRM No. M-31068 of 2010 (O&M)
Onkar Nath and another ..... Petitioners vs State of Punjab and others ..... Respondents
Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal
Present: Mr. Puneet Sharma, Advocate for Mr. Sandeep Arora, Advocate, for the petitioners.
Rajesh Bindal J.
Prayer made in the present petition is for protection of life and liberty of the petitioners, who had married against the consent of their parents. Both the petitioners are present in Court. They have appended a copy of Marriage Certificate (Annexure P7) issued by Pracheen Gugga Mari Ram Krishan Mandir, Sector 19-D, Chandigarh. As per certificate Annexure P-2 issued by the Uttranchal Education and Examination Council (Education Department, Uttranchal Government), the date of birth of petitioner no. 2 is 1.7.1987 and she was more than 18 years of age on the date of the marriage which according to the petitioners was solemnised on 17.10.2010. They are apprehending their arrest and also harassment by the police and family members of petitioner no. 2, as they were not agreeable to the marriage.
Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that both the petitioners are major and have married against the wishes of their parents and as such they are fearing threat to their life and liberty.
Accordingly, the instant petition is disposed of with the direction to Commissioner of Police, Jalandhar, that in case the petitioners move an application before the aforesaid authority to provide protection to their life and liberty, the same shall be considered and if required, necessary protection be provided to the petitioners. This order may not be treated as a seal of the Court on the marriage of the parties.
(Rajesh Bindal) Judge
18.10.2010 vs.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether direction to police to provide protection to parties of inter-caste/against-consent marriage is maintainable.
Onkar Nath
anonymous
State of Punjab
Rajesh Bindal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
