Disposed

Gurshabad Singh and Anr. v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC24 May 2011CRM-M/16167/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court in a criminal miscellaneous petition heard under Section 482 Cr.P.C. heard a case where petitioners feared threats from private respondents due to their marriage. The Court directed the SSP to verify facts regarding age and marriage and provide protection if credible threats are found.

What did the court decide?

Direction to SSP Amritsar to verify petitioners' age and marriage details and provide protection if serious threats are confirmed.

Gurshabad Singh and Anr. Vs State of Punjab… — Matrimonial and Divorce | Punjab & Haryana HC (2011)

¶1

(1)

¶2

Crl. Misc. No. M-16167 of 2011 (O&M)

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

Crl. Misc. No. M-16167 of 2011 (O&M)

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 24.05.2011

¶6

Gurshabad Singh and another

¶7

..........Petitioners

¶8

Versus

¶9

State of Punjab and others

¶10

..........Respondents

¶11

BEFORE:- HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY

¶12

Present:Mr. K.S. Goraya, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶13

¶14

DAYA CHAUDHARY, J.

¶15

Crl. Misc. No. 29061 of 2011

¶16

Application is allowed as prayed for.

¶17

Crl. Misc. No. M-16167 of 2011

¶18

The present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed on behalf of Gurshabad Singh and Roopinder Kaur for issuing directions to the official respondents to protect their lives and liberty as they have solemnized their marriage contrary to the wishes of private respondents.

¶19

Both the petitioners are present in Court and claim themselves to be major on the basis of documents annexed with the petition and they are apprehending threats at the instance of private respondents.

¶20

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have moved a representation (Annexure P-5) to respondent No.2 i.e. SSP, Bathinda but no action has been taken. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that the petitioners would be satisfied if the representation filed by them is decided within some specified period and moreover, there

¶21

(2)

¶22

Crl. Misc. No. M-16167 of 2011 (O&M)

¶23

is no legal impediments in issuing such directions.

¶24

Without commenting anything on the merits of the case as well validity and age of the petitioners, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2-SSP, Amritsar to look into the representation (Annexure P-5) filed by the petitioners and after verifying the factual position with regard to their age, marriage and apprehension at the instance of private respondents, if he comes to the conclusion that a serious threat is there, then necessary protection be provided as per law.

¶25

Disposed of accordingly.

¶26

(DAYA CHAUDHARY) JUDGE

¶27

May 24, 2011 pooja

Gurshabad Singh and Anr. v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gurshabad Singh and Anr. v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sudesh Kumar Sharma Vs State of Haryana and Anr.

Sudesh Kumar Sharma Vs State of Haryana and Anr.

Aarti & Anr. Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

Preety and Anr. Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Kamalpreet Kaur & Anr. Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Raj Sandhu @ Rajpal Kaur Sandhu and Ors. Vs Ut of Chandigarh and Anr.