Kajal and Another vs State of Haryana and Others

Jitendra Chauhan, J.—Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the petitioners are major and there is no legal impediment to their marriage. They have solemnized marriage. Their marriage is opposed by respondent Nos. 5 to 9, who are the family members of petitioner No. 1. Learned counsel refers to Annexure P-1 and contends that the date of birth of the petitioner No. 1 is 1.12.1993 and she is the only female child of her parents and the entry made in the Mark Sheet of Secondary Examination is against the record. He further submits that she is major.

Notice of motion.

At the asking of the Court, Mr. Ajay Gulati, DAG, Haryana, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State. A complete copy of the paper book has been furnished to the learned State counsel, in the Court. Without expressing any opinion with regard to validity of marriage and on the merits of the allegations made, the instant petition is disposed of with the direction to respondent No. 2, Superintendent of Police, Jind, that in case the petitioners move an application before him seeking protection for their life and liberty, he will look into the matter and provide necessary protection to the petitioners, if he is satisfied that the life and liberty of the petitioners is threatened at the hands of respondent Nos. 5 to 9, in accordance with law.