Allowed

Nirmala Sharma & Ors. v. Ut of Chandigarh & Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC25 Jan 2011CRM-M/2388/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal miscellaneous application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the High Court of Punjab and Haryana directed protection for minor and adult petitioners in an inter-religion marriage. The court relied on Supreme Court observations to direct the Special Police Officer to investigate threats to life and liberty without validating the marriage's legality.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Respondent No. 2 (SP, Chandigarh) to personally investigate allegations, take necessary steps, and grant protection to petitioners if they feel insecure.

Nirmala Sharma & Ors. Vs Ut… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Punjab & Haryana HC (2011)

¶1

(1)

¶2

Crl. Misc. No. M-2388 of 2011 (O&M)

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

Crl. Misc. No. M-2388 of 2011 (O&M)

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 25.01.2011

¶6

Nirmala Sharma and another

¶7

..........Petitioners

¶8

Versus

¶9

U.T., Chandigarh and others

¶10

..........Respondents

¶11

BEFORE:- HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY

¶12

Present:Mr. Rishu Mahajan, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶13

¶14

DAYA CHAUDHARY, J.

¶15

Crl. Misc. No. 4465 of 2011

¶16

Application is allowed as prayed for.

¶17

Crl. Misc. No. M-2388 of 2011

¶18

The present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for issuance of directions to the official respondents to provide adequate security to protect lives and liberty of the petitioners who apprehend threats to their lives at the hands of private respondents and for further direction not to harass and interfere in their peaceful married life and not to intrude into their privacy.

¶19

The petitioners, who are present in Court, claim to be major on the basis of documents annexed with the petition and they got married contrary to the wishes of their parents and are apprehending threats to their lives and liberty.

¶20

Even though this Court is disinclined to entertain and to go into such allegations, but at the same time it cannot be oblivious to the fact that because of social friction and sectarian differences such incidents are not entirely unheard of and prima facie the case also appears to be covered by

¶21

(2)

¶22

Crl. Misc. No. M-2388 of 2011 (O&M)

¶23

the observations of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Fiaz Ahmed Ahanger and others Vs. State of J&K 2009 (3) R.A.J. 692, which are as under:-

¶24

“In such cases of inter-caste or inter religion marriage the Court has only to be satisfied about two things:-

¶25

(1)that the girl is above 18 years of age, in which case, the law regards her as a major vide Section 3 of the Indian Majority Act, 1875. A major is deemed by the law to know what is in his or her welfare.

¶26

(2)The wish of the girl.

¶27

In the circumstances, we direct that nobody will harass, threaten or commit any acts of violence or other unlawful act on the petitioner, Chanchali Devi/Mehvesh Anjum and the petitioner' family members and they shall not be arrested till further orders in connection with the case in question. If they feel insecure, they can apply to the police and, in such event, the police shall grant protection to them.”

¶28

In view of this, the petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No. 2 i.e. SP, Chandigarh to look into the allegations as contained in the petition personally and take necessary steps in accordance with law if the situation so warrants.

¶29

This order shall not be construed to be conferring the legitimacy or authenticity to the factum of marriage having been performed as the Court is clearly deprived of any means to determine the aforesaid facts.

¶30

Copy of the petition along with a copy of this order be sent to respondent No.2.

¶31

January 25, 2011 (DAYA CHAUDHARY) pooja JUDGE

¶32

Crl. Misc. No. M-2388 of 2011 (O&M) (3)

¶33

Note:-Whether this case is to be referred to the Reporter .......Yes/No

Nirmala Sharma & Ors. v. Ut of Chandigarh & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nirmala Sharma & Ors. v. Ut of Chandigarh & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gurdev Singh Deol Vs State of Punjab

Mandeep Singh & Anr. Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Harjot Singh and Anr. Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Suman & Anr. Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Monika & Anr. Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Prince Kaur and Anr. Vs State of Punjab and Ors.