Partly allowed

Kavita Kumari and Anr. v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC4 Feb 2011CRM-M/3736/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal miscellaneous petition, the High Court of Punjab and Haryana issued protection orders for two major adult women apprehending threats to their lives in an inter-caste marriage. The court directed the respondent SSP to investigate and prevent harassment.

What did the court decide?

4.02.2011. Petition disposed of with direction to respondent No.2 (S.S.P., Ambala Cantt.) to look into allegations personally and take necessary steps.

Kavita Kumari and Anr. Vs Stat… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Punjab & Haryana HC (2011)

¶1

Crl.Misc. No.M-3736 of 2011

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

Crl.Misc. No.M-3736 of 2011

¶5

Date of Decision: 4.02.2011

Kavita Kumar & Anr.

...Petitioners

Vs.

The State of Haryana & Ors.

¶10

...Respondents

¶11

BEFORE: HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY

¶12

Present: Ms.Garima Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioners.

¶13

DAYA CHAUDHARY,J.

¶14

Crl.M.No.6823 of 2011

¶15

Application is allowed as prayed for.

¶16

Crl.M.No.M-3136 of 2011

¶17

The present petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 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.

¶18

The petitioners, who are present in Court, claim to be major on

¶19

Crl.Misc. No.M-3736 of 2011

¶20

¶21

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.

¶22

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 the observations of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Fiaz Ahmed Ahanger

¶23

and others Vs. State of J & K 2009 (3) R.A.J. 692, which are as under: “In such cases of inter-caste or inter religion marriage the Court has only to be satisfied about two things:-

¶24

(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.

¶25

(2) The wish of the girl.

¶26

In the circumstances, we direct that nobody will harass, threaten or commit any acts or violence or other unlawful act on the petitioner, Chanchal Devi/Mahvesh 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.”

¶27

In view of this, the petition is disposed of with a direction to

¶28

Crl.Misc. No.M-3736 of 2011

¶29

¶30

respondent No.2 i.e. S.S.P., Ambala Cantt. to look into the allegations as contained in the petition personally and take necessary steps in accordance with law if the situation so warrants.

¶31

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.

¶32

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

¶33

(DAYA CHAUDHARY) February 4, 2011 JUDGE rp

Kavita Kumari and Anr. v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kavita Kumari and Anr. v. State of Haryana and 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

Vikas Kumar Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Jyoti Vs State of Haryana & Others

Mahabir Goel Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Manju Vs State of Haryana and Others

Brijesh Sharma Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

Mohd. Iqbal Vs State of Haryana & Ors.