Disposed

Ramanjit Kaur and Others v. State of Punjab and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC9 Apr 2013CRM-M/10005/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners filed a writ petition seeking life protection under daughter's protection act after disputed marriage. Court directed release from shelter home and FDR deposit for restraint but found interim order partially uncomplied. Court disposed of petition granting liberty and relief.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed but liberty granted to approach authorities for protection; released from Nari Niketan; bank informed to extend FDR for three years.

Ramanjit Kaur and Others Vs State of… — Child Custody and Guardianship | Punjab & Haryana HC (2013)

¶1

CRM M-10005 of 2013

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CRM M-10005 of 2013 Date of Decision: April 09, 2013

¶5

Ramanjit Kaur and another

¶6

... Petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶8

State of Punjab and others

¶9

... Respondents

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PARAMJEET SINGH

¶11

Present: Mr. Lovkesh Gupta, Advocate, for the petitioners.

¶12

Mr. Gurinderjit Singh, DAG, Punjab.

¶13

Mr. J.S. Bhinder, Advocate, for respondent Nos. 5 and 7.

¶14

Paramjeet Singh, J. (Oral)

¶15

Instant petition has been filed seeking protection of life and liberty of the petitioners from respondent Nos. 4 to 8. The petitioners assert that they are major and as there is no legal impediment, they have got married. They have already moved a representation dated 22.03.2013 (Annexure P/5) to respondent No.2 – Senior Superintendent of Police, Hoshiarpur, for protecting their life and liberty.

¶16

On 04.04.2013, the following order was passed by this Court:-

¶17

“In compliance with the order dated 26.03.2013 of this Court, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Tanda Urmur has

¶18

CRM M-10005 of 2013

¶19

¶20

filed his report dated 03.04.2013 and the same is taken on record.

¶21

Both the petitioners are present in Court.

¶22

Petitioner No.2 to show his bona fide, states that he will deposit a sum of Rs.50,000/- in the form of FDR for a period of three years in favour of petitioner no.1 before the adjourned date.

¶23

Protection Home is directed to release petitioner no.2.

¶24

However, if petitioner no.2 comes with the requisite form for depositing the amount in the form of FDR in the name of petitioner no.1, then Nari Niketan authorities shall take it and get the same signed from petitioner no.1 and authenticate the signatures of petitioner no.1.

¶25

Notice of motion for 09.04.2013.

¶26

Respondent No.3 – S.H.O., P.S. Tanda, Hoshiarpur shall ensure the service upon respondent Nos. 4 to 8.

¶27

Petitioner no.1 be produced before this Court on the adjourned date.

¶28

Copy of this order be given to the concerned authorities under signatures of the Bench Secretary.”

¶29

Learned counsel for the petitioners states that in compliance of order dated 04.04.2013, petitioner no.2 has deposited the entire amount i.e. Rs.50,000/- in the form of FDR for one year in favour of petitioner no.1. A photocopy of receipt, filed in Court, is taken on record.

¶30

Learned counsel for the parties state that the parties have effected compromise.

¶31

The order dated 04.04.2013 has not been complied with in toto in so far as the FDR has been done for one year instead of three years.

¶32

Keeping in view the above, the instant petition is disposed of

¶33

CRM M-10005 of 2013 3

¶34

and liberty is granted to the petitioners to approach respondent no.2 – Senior Superintendent of Police, Hoshiarpur for protection, as per instructions dated 18.08.2010 issued by the Home Department, Punjab. Petitioners may not be arrested and adequate security be provided to them, if required.

¶35

Nari Niketan authorities are directed to release petitioner no.1 from Nari Niketan.

¶36

Registry is directed to inform the concerned bank that the aforesaid FDR should be continued for three years and amount thereof shall be released on its maturity.

¶37

Copy of this order be given to the concerned authorities under signatures of the Bench Secretary.

¶38

April 09, 2013 [Paramjeet Singh] vkd Judge

Ramanjit Kaur and Others v. State of Punjab and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramanjit Kaur and Others v. State of Punjab and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

G S Makkar Vs Cbi, Chd & Anr.

Ashok Vs State of Haryana

Jarnail Singh Dhami Vs State of Punjab

Babita Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Jagir Singh Vs State of Haryana

Kawalpreet Singh Vs State of Punjab and Anr.