High CourtsSingle Bench

Dorthi and another vs State of Punjab and others

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 17 September 2018 · Citation: (2018) 09 P&H CK 0101

HON’BLE JUDGES
Hari Pal Verma, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 482
RESULT
Disposed off
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Miscellaneous -M- No. 40580 of 2018
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

13 paragraphs · 248 words

Prayer in this petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is for issuance of directions to the respondents No.2 and 3 to protect the life and liberty of the

petitioners at the hands of private respondents No.4 and 5.

Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the petitioners are major and have solemnized their marriage in accordance with law. However,

respondents No.4 and 5 are not accepting their marriage and are adamant to separate them from each other by resorting to illegal means. Learned

counsel further submits that in view of imminent danger to the life and liberty of the petitioners, they had moved a representation dated 11.09.2018

(Annexure P-4) to the respondent No.2 i.e. Senior Superintendent of Police, Kapurthala.

Notice of motion to respondents No.1 to 3 only at this stage.

On asking of the Court, Mr. Surinder Pal Singh Tinna, Additional Advocate General, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of these respondents.

Let requisite number of copies of paper book be given to learned State counsel during the course of the day.

In view of the above, without going into the validity of the marriage, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent No.2 to take

appropriate remedial measures, as warranted by law, on the representation dated 11.09.2018 (Annexure P-4) submitted by the petitioners.

In the meantime, necessary order be passed to ensure that no harm is caused to the life and liberty of the petitioners at the hands of respondents No.4

and 5.