Dismissed

Sarabjeet Kaur and Anr. v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC8 May 2013CRM-M/12498/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a petition for habeas corpus in a matrimonial dispute. Relying on precedent, the Court held it cannot adjudicate the correctness of personal decisions between two adults. It denied forcible custody by respondents while ensuring safety mechanisms remain open.

What did the court decide?

Directed that petitioners cannot be forcibly taken into custody by respondents; they may approach police for protection if threatened.

Sarabjeet Kaur and Anr. Vs State of Punjab… — Service and Employment | Punjab & Haryana HC (2013)

¶1

CRM-M-12498 of 2013.(O&M).

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

CRM-M-12498 of 2013.(O&M). Date of decision: May 8, 2013.

¶4

Sarabjeet Kaur and another

¶5

..... Petitioners

¶6

Versus

¶7

State of Punjab and others

¶8

..... Respondents

¶9

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.S. BEDI

¶10

Present: Mr.K.S.Lakhanpal, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶11

Mr.Ankur Jain, AAG., Punjab.

¶12

¶13

M.M.S. BEDI, J. (Oral)

¶14

The parents of petitioner No.1 have appeared and opposed the petition contending that the petitioner No.1 has been allured by petitioner No.2 and that she has left the house by committing theft of the articles and that petitioner No.1 is not doing any job and is not suitable for petitioner No.1.

¶15

Without entering into the controversy regarding the authenticity of the marriage this Court is of the opinion that in the exercise of powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., it does not lie within the ambit of the jurisdiction of this Court to determine the correctness of the decision taken by the petitioners but the fact remains that

¶16

¶17

CRM-M-12498 of 2013.(O&M).

¶18

petitioner No.1 insists, at this stage to stay with petitioner No.1. Both the parties being major, the matter is covered by the judgment in case Pardeep Kumar Vs.State of Haryana, 2008 (3) RCR (Crl.) 376.

¶19

The petitioners cannot be forcibly caused any harm for right or wrong decision taken by them. Right of life and liberty is constitutional right which could not be denied to the petitioners. However, in the interest of justice, an opportunity has been given to the parents of petitioner No.1 to talk with her and be satisfied regarding factum of petitioner No.1 being happy. Expecting that the relationship of petitioner would be accepted by private respondents, this petition is disposed of with a direction that the petitioners cannot be forcibly taken in custody by the respondents on the allegations that petitioner No.1 has been kidnapped or abducted by petitioner No.2. In case of any threat to their life and liberty, it will always be open to the petitioner to approach the police authorities or the Senior Superintendent of Police, Kapurthala, for protection.

¶20

A copy of the order be given dasti to the petitioners on payment of usual charges.

¶21

May 8, 2013. rka

¶22

(M.M.S. BEDI) JUDGE

¶23

Sarabjeet Kaur and Anr. v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sarabjeet Kaur and Anr. v. State of Punjab 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

Ashwinder Singh @ Honey Vs State of Punjab

Amarjit Kaur and Ors. Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Sandeep Goyal Vs State of Haryana and Anr.

Shakuntala Sharma & Anr. Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

Gurtej Singh Vs State of Punjab

Satinder Singh Vs State of Punjab