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
6 paragraphs · 277 wordsManjari Nehru Kaul, J
Prayer in the instant petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is for issuance of directions to respondents No.2 and 3 to protect the life and liberty of the petitioners, who have married against the wishes of private respondents i.e. respondents No.4 and 5.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioner No.1–Pooja Garg, aged about 23 years and petitioner No.2– Anmol Mittal, aged about 24 years, have got married against the wishes of their family members, arrayed as respondents No.4 and 5. It has further been submitted that the private respondents are threatening to interfere in the marital life of the petitioners. Hence, they have approached respondent No.2 by filing representation dated 31. 05.2022 (Annexure P-6) seeking protection in that regard and have also approached this Court by way of filing the instant petition.
Notice of motion.
On the asking of Court, Mr. Luvinder Sofat, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab, who is present in Court, accepts notice on behalf of respondents No.1 to 3.
In view of the above, the petition is disposed off with a direction to respondent No.2-Senior Superintendent of Police, Mansa to look into the representation dated 31.05.2022 (Annexure P-6) at the earliest and take necessary steps, if any required, in accordance with law, to ensure that the life and liberty of the petitioners is not jeopardized at the hands of the private respondents. However, this direction will not validate the marriage said to have taken place between the parties and will have no effect on any civil or criminal action, which could be initiated in the matter in accordance with law.