High CourtsSINGLE BENCH

Kiranjeet Kaur and another vs State of Punjab and others

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 18 October 2017 · Citation: (2017) 10 P&H CK 0015

HON’BLE JUDGES
Rajbir Sehrawat
RESULT
Disposed
CASE NUMBER
39536-2017

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

36 paragraphs · 392 words
1.

Both the petitioners are present in person and identified by their

counsel. They seek protection of their life and liberty by contending

that both of them having attained the age of majority, have married

each other against the wishes of their respective family members

respondent Nos. 4 to 11 and so seek appropriate protection from the

authorities. They submitted a representation (Annexure P-6) in this

regard to the Commissioner of Police, Amritsar dated NIL, but are still

apprehensive about their security in view of the apparent inaction and

alleged clout of their family members/ respondents.

2.

Both of them do appear to have crossed the age of majority as seen

from the copies of documents filed and have married each other, in

support of which photographs (Annexure P-4) and Marriage Certificate

issued by Gurudwara Dashmesh Pita Patshahi Dasvi (Regd.) Village

Singa Devi, Teh. Kharar, District Mohali (Pb)have been placed on

record.

3.

For the aforesaid reasons, this appears to be a fit case for this Court to

invoke the inherent powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. and in

view of the mandate contained in Article 21 of the Constitution of India

to protect the citizen''s right to life and liberty.

4.

Thus, the Commissioner of Police, Amritsar is directed to consider the

representation dated NIL (Annexure P-6) and take appropriate steps to

ensure that no harm is caused to the life and liberty of the petitioners.

5.

It is nevertheless clarified that this order is issued only on the premise

that the petitioners have crossed the age of majority as seen from the

documents placed on record being Birth certificate (Annexure P-1),

Matriculation Certificate (Annexure P-2) and Aadhar Card (Annexure

P-8) of petitioner No.2 and Matriculation Certificate (Annexure P-10)

and petitioner No. 2 has not produced on record a copy of her Aadhar

Card. However, petitioner No.1 has appended an affidavit in support of

her date of birth (Annexure P-9). This would not ipso facto amount to

granting any seal of approval on the legality of their marriage which

essentially would come in the domain of the concerned Matrimonial

Courts. Further, they would not be entitled for any protection against

their arrest or continuance of any criminal proceedings, if otherwise,

found to be involved in commission of any cognizable offence(s).

6.

The petition is disposed off with the above direction.