Petitioners, major inter-caste spouses, sought protection from family members apprehending threat to liberty. Court allowed petition directing SP to act and prohibiting forcible custody.
Directed Superintendent of Police to look into representation and protect liberty; prohibited forcible custody on abduction allegations.
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.
CRM-M-10421-2014 (O&M)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-10421-2014 (O&M). Decided on: March 24, 2014.
Seema Saini and another
..... Petitioner(s)
Versus
State of Haryana and others
..... Respondent(s)
*** * * CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.S. BEDI PRESENT Mr.G.S.Goraya, Advocate, for the petitioners.**
M.M.S. BEDI, J (ORAL).
The petitioners claim that they are major and have married against the wishes of their family members. Apprehending threat to their life and liberty, they have sought protection through the instant petition.
It is claimed that it is an inter caste marriage.
They have submitted a representation to the Superintendent of Police, Kurukshetra, dated 20.3.2014, Annexure P4.
Notice of motion to the Advocate General, Haryana.
On asking of the Court, Mr.Deepak Girotra, AAG., Haryana, who is present in the Court, accepts notice.
1
Raj Kumar Arora 2014.03.25 11:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CRM-M-10421-2014 (O&M)
The matter is covered by the judgment in case Pardeep Kumar Vs.State of Haryana, 2008 (3) RCR (Crl.) 376.
The petition is allowed. It is directed that the Superintendent of Police, Kurukshetra, will look into the representation of the petitioners Annexure P4 and take necessary steps if required for protection of the liberty of the petitioner. It is further directed that the petitioners will not be forcibly taken in custody by any of the respondents on the allegations that petitioner No.1 has been kidnapped or abducted by petitioner No.2.
(M.M.S. BEDI) March 24, 2014. JUDGE rka
2
Raj Kumar Arora 2014.03.25 11:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
3 issues framed by the court
Whether petitioners seeking protection in inter-caste marriage against family wishes should be granted relief.
Whether petitioner can be forcibly taken in custody on abduction allegations.
Whether Superintendent of Police must act on petitioners' representation for protection.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Pardeep Kumar Vs. State of HaryanaExplained¶19
Pardeep Kumar Vs.State of Haryana, 2008 (3) RCR (Crl.) 376.
Seema Saini
another
State of Haryana
M.M.S. Bedi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
