High Court allowed a petition by two women claiming marital threats. The court directed the SSP Amritsar to verify their age and the gravity of threats before providing protection.
Direction to SSP Amritsar to verify age and threats facts to provide necessary protection.
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)x`x
Crl. Misc. No. M-9242 of 2011 (O&M)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Crl. Misc. No. M-9242 of 2011 (O&M)
DATE OF DECISION: 28.03.2011
Karamjit Kaur and another
..........Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and others
..........Respondents
BEFORE:- HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY
Present:Mr. Karan Singh, Advocate for Mr. Balkar Singh, Advocate for the petitioners.
DAYA CHAUDHARY, J.
Crl. Misc. No. 16902 of 2011
Application is allowed as prayed for.
Crl. Misc. No. M-9242 of 2011
The present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed on behalf of Karamjit Kaur and Kulwinder Singh 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.
Both the petitioners are present in Court and claim themselves to be major on the basis of documents annexed with the petition. Petitioner No.1 is more than 31 years of age and claims herself to be unmarried and petitioner No.2 is more than 21 years of age and they are apprehending threats at the instance of private respondents.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have moved a representation (Annexure P-5) to respondent No.2 i.e.
(2)x`x
Crl. Misc. No. M-9242 of 2011 (O&M)
S.S.P., Amritsar 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 is no legal impediments in issuing such directions.
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-S.S.P., 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.
Disposed of accordingly.
March 28, 2011 (DAYA CHAUDHARY) pooja JUDGE
Note:-Whether this case is to be referred to the Reporter .......Yes/No
Karamjit Kaur
another
State of Punjab
Daya Chaudhary
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
