Geeta and Another v. State of Haryana and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC26 Mar 2025CRWP/2992/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Protection of life and liberty; married couple; Article 226 Constitution of India; CRWP; Punjab & Haryana High Court at Chandigarh; Sudeepti Sharma, J.; SSP Faridkot; SP Rewari; representation dated 01.03.2025; representation dated 14.02.2025; Annexure P-1; Annexure P-2; Annexure P-3; no immunity from legal action; no opinion on validity of marriage; disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Directions to respondent No.2, Senior Superintendent of Police, Faridkot (Punjab), to decide the representation dated 01.03.2025 (Annexure P-3), and to respondent No.4, Superintendent of Police, Rewari (Haryana), to decide the representation dated 14.02.2025 (Annexure P-1) of petitioner No.1, and to grant the petitioners protection if any threat to their lives and liberty is perceived. ¶¶21

Geeta and Another Vs State of Haryana and… — Writ and Judicial Review | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶21

Issue for consideration

Whether directions should be issued to respondents No.3 and 4 to ensure protection of the petitioners' lives and liberty at the hands of respondents No.5 to 9, who are aggrieved by the petitioners' marriage, and to restrain the latter from harassing the petitioners or interfering in their peaceful life.

¶¶14

Court's answer

Without entering upon an exercise to evaluate the evidentiary value of the documents placed on the file, the petition was disposed of with directions to respondent No.2, Senior Superintendent of Police, Faridkot (Punjab), to decide the representation dated 01.03.2025 (Annexure P-3), and to respondent No.4, Superintendent of Police, Rewari (Haryana), to decide the representation dated 14.02.2025 (Annexure P-1) of petitioner No.1, and to grant the petitioners protection if any threat to their lives and liberty is perceived.

¶¶21

Ratio / Principle

The order shall not be taken to grant the petitioners immunity from legal action against any violation of law committed by them.

¶¶21

Key takeaways

The order shall not be understood to have expressed any opinion whatsoever by this Court on the validity of the marriage of the petitioners.ratio¶¶21

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India filed by Geeta and another, a couple alleging they lawfully solemnized marriage after attaining the statutory minimum age, seeking protection of their lives and liberty from respondents No.5 to 9, aggrieved by the marriage, and restraint against harassment or interference in their peaceful life. The High Court of Punjab & Haryana (Sudeepti Sharma, J.) disposed of the petition without evaluating the evidentiary value of the documents on file, directing respondent No.2, Senior Superintendent of Police, Faridkot (Punjab), to decide the representation dated 01.03.2025 (Annexure P-3) and respondent No.4, Superintendent of Police, Rewari (Haryana), to decide the representation dated 14.02.2025 (Annexure P-1) of petitioner No.1, and to grant protection if any threat to their lives and liberty is perceived. The Court clarified that the order confers no immunity from legal action for violation of law and expresses no opinion on the validity of the marriage.

¶1

CRWP-2992-2025

¶2

--1--

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

109

¶5

CRWP-2992-2025 Date of Decision: 26.03.2025

Geeta and another

......Petitioners

Vs.

State of Haryana and others

¶10

......Respondents

¶11

CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA

¶12

Present: Mr. Arun Kumar, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶13

SUDEEPTI SHARMA.J. (ORAL)

¶14

Through the instant petition, as filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have sought issuance of directions upon the respondents No.3 and 4, to ensure protection of their lives and liberty at the hands of respondent No.5 to 9, and, also to restrain the said respondents from harassing the petitioners or interfering in their peaceful life.

¶15

The counsel for the petitioners state that since both the petitioners have attained the minimum age, as prescribed by statute, for solemnizing marriage, therefore, they have lawfully solemnized marriage, however, it has caused grievance to the respondent Nos.5 to 9. Such grievance of the respondent Nos.5 to 9 has made them apprehensive of danger to their lives and liberty and resultantly, it has constrained them to approach this court, to seek protection of their lives and liberty. The marriage certificate of the petitioners is available on record as Annexure P-2.

¶16

VIRENDRA SINGH ADHIKARI 2025.04.01 10:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶17

CRWP-2992-2025 --2--

¶18

The petitioner No.1 has also submitted a representation dated 14.02.2025 (Annexure P-1) to respondent No.4 and another representation dated 01.03.2025 to respondent No.3.

¶19

Notice of motion to the official respondent(s) only.

¶20

On the asking of the Court, Mr. Arjun Lakhanpal, Addl. A.G., Haryana, accepts notice on behalf of official respondents No.1 and 4 and Mr. Jasjeet Singh Dhaliwal, AAG, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of the official respondents No.2 and 3.

¶21

Without entering upon an exercise to evaluate the evidentiary value of the documents placed on the file, the instant petition is disposed of with directions to respondent No.2-Senior Superintendent of Police, Faridkot, (Punjab), to decide the representation dated 01.03.2025 (Annexure P-3) and respondent No.4-Superintendent of Police, Rewari, (Haryana) to decide the representation dated 14.02.2025 (Annexure P-1) of petitioner No.1 and grant them protection, if any threat to their lives and liberty is perceived. It is clarified that this order shall not be taken to grant immunity to the petitioners from legal action against violation of law, if any, committed by them. This order shall not be understood to have expressed any opinion whatsoever by this Court on the validity of the marriage of the petitioners.

¶22

Disposed of accordingly.

¶23

(SUDEEPTI SHARMA) JUDGE

¶24

26.03.2025 Virrendra

¶25

Whether speaking/reasoned: Speaking Whether reportable: Yes / No

¶26

VIRENDRA SINGH ADHIKARI 2025.04.01 10:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Geeta and Another v. State of Haryana and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Geeta and Another v. State of Haryana and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gurpreet Singh Alias Gaggi and Other Vs State of Punjab and Another

Rupinder Singh and Others Vs State of Haryana and Others

Santosh etc. Vs Satbir @ Kalia and Ors.

Nirmal Singh Vs State of Punjab and Another

National Insur. Co. Ltd. Vs Om Parkash Punia and Ors.

M/S Shiv Shakti Grains (India) Pvt. Ltd. and Others Vs M/S Sood Trading Company