Petitioners sought protection under Section 482 Cr.P.C. after marrying against family wishes. The court directed respondent police to investigate and provide security.
Directions to respondent no. 2 to take necessary action to provide protection to petitioners, if required.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Crl. Misc. No. M-12287 of 2013 Date of Decision:- 15.4.2013
Harpreet Kaur and another ..............PETITIONER(S)
vs.
State of Punjab and others ...........RESPONDENT(S)
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S. SANDHAWALIA
Present:Mr. Sarvesh Kumar Gupta, Advocate, for the petitioners.
G.S. SANDHAWALIA, J. (ORAL)
Crl. Misc. No. M-12287 of 2013
-2-
petitioners and keeping in view the binding precedent of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Lata Singh vs. State of U.P. And another, 2006 (2) SCC (Criminal) 478, the present petition is disposed of with directions to respondent no. 2 to look into the matter and take necessary action in accordance with law and provide protection, if required.
15.04.2013 'sp
(G.S. Sandhawalia) Judge
1 issue framed by the court
Whether petitioners are entitled to protection from danger to life and liberty due to marriage against family wishes under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Lata Singh vs. State of U.P. And anotherFollowed¶14
Lata Singh vs. State of U.P. And another, 2006 (2) SCC (Criminal) 478 · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Harpreet Kaur and another
State of Punjab and others
G.S. Sandhawalia
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
