Disposed

Pinky and Another v. State of Haryana and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC22 Apr 2014CRM-M/13401/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The single-judge bench disposed of a criminal miscellaneous petition by directing the Superintendent of Police, Ambala to examine a representation by the petitioners and take appropriate action, explicitly stating the order does not affect the validity of their marriage.

What did the court decide?

Order directing respondent Superintendent of Police, Ambala to look into the petitioners' representation dated 16.04.2014 and take appropriate action in accordance with law.

Pinky and Another Vs State of… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Punjab & Haryana HC (2014)

¶1

CRM-M No.13401 of 2014

¶2

-1-

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

Crl. Misc. No.M-13401 of 2014 (O&M) Date of decision : April 22, 2014.

Pinky and another

... Petitioners

VERSUS

State of Haryana and others

¶9

... Respondents

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURINDER GUPTA

¶11

Present: Petitioners in person with Mr. Bhupinder Ghai, Advocate for Mr. A.K. Handa, Advocate.

¶12

SURINDER GUUPTA, J.(Oral)

¶13

Affidavits of both the petitioners are already on record.

¶14

Notice of motion.

¶15

On the asking of the Court, Mr. G.S. Chahal, Addl. A.G. Haryana who is present in the Court accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State. Copy of the paper book supplied to him.

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioners has limited his prayer for taking appropriate action in accordance with law on the representation dated 16.04.2014 (Annexure P-5 ) made by petitioner No.1. It has been stated that date of birth of petitioner No.1-Pinky is 06.03.1986 and date of birth of petitioner No.2-Naveen Rai is 04.07.1990. They got married on 16.04.2014. Photographs of marriage are Annexure P-3.

¶17

In view of the limited prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioners and without going into the merits of the claim raised, this

¶18

Mehta Sachin 2014.04.23 10:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CHANDIGARH

¶19

CRM-M No.13401 of 2014

¶20

-2-

¶21

petition is disposed of with direction to respondent No.2-Superintendent of Police, Ambala to look into the representation dated 16.04.2014 (Annexure P-

¶22

and take appropriate action in accordance with law.

¶23

However, it is made clear that this order will have no effect on

¶24

the validity of alleged marriage of the petitioners or on any other civil or criminal proceedings instituted against them.

¶25

April 22, 2014 (SURINDER GUPTA) Sachin M. JUDGE

¶26

Mehta Sachin 2014.04.23 10:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CHANDIGARH

Pinky and Another v. State of Haryana and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pinky and Another v. State of Haryana and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Santokh Singh Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Ali Mohd Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

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

Palan @ Jaspal Kaur Vs Sukhwinder Kaur

Deepti and Anr. Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Arvind Mishra Vs State of Punjab & Ors.