High Court directed police to provide protection to petitioners facing apprehended danger to life without expressing opinion on marriage validity or age. Petition disposed.
Direction to R2 & R3 to consider representation and provide protection 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
CRM-M No. 12418 of 2013 Date of Decision:- 17.4.2013
Harmeet Kaur and another ..............Petitioners
vs.
State of Punjab and others ...........Respondents
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S. SANDHAWALIA
Present:Mr. M.K. Singla, Advocate, for the petitioners.
G.S. SANDHAWALIA, J. (ORAL)
2
CRM-M No. 12418 of 2013
respondents and their relatives.
17.04.2013 'sp
(G.S. Sandhawalia) Judge
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the court should direct police protection for petitioners facing apprehended danger to life despite not deciding on the merits or validity of the marriage.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Lata Singh vs. State of U.P.Explained¶14
Lata Singh vs. State of U.P. and another, 2006 (2) SCC (Criminal) 478. · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Harmeet 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
