A single judge dismissed a petition for protection of life and liberty without evaluating documentary evidence, instead directing the Special Cell to treat the petition as a representation and decide within one month, explicitly excluding protection from legal action for potential law violations.
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-15433 of 2013(O&M) Date of Decision: May 10,2013
Vani Gupta & Anr.
... Petitioners
vs.
State of Punjab & Ors.
... Respondents
CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJENDER SINGH MALIK
Present:Mr. Ashok Arora, Advocate for Mr. J.K. Goel, Advocate for the petitioners.
VIJENDER SINGH MALIK,J(ORAL)
Vani Gupta and Amit Chauhan, the petitioners before me, claim themselves to be major and claiming that they have married against the wishes of respondents No. 4 to 6, seek protection to their life and liberty. They apprehend danger to them from the side of respondents no. 4 to 6. They have placed on record photographs and marriage certificate, Annexures P-3 and P-4 respectively, evidencing their marriage.
Without entering upon an exercise to evaluate the evidentiary value of the documents placed on the file, I dispose of the petition with the direction to respondent no.2 to treat this petition as a representation and to decide the same within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy thereof and grant them protection, if any threat to their life and liberty is perceived. It is made clear that this order shall not be
Crl. Misc. No.M-15433 of 2013 =2=
taken to protect the petitioners from legal action for violation of law if any committed by them.
May 10,2013 ( VIJENDER SINGH MALIK ) Jiten JUDGE
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioners seeking protection from threats to their life and liberty due to marriage against family wishes are entitled to immediate protection.
Vani Gupta & Anr.
State of Punjab & Ors.
Vijender Singh Malik
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
