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
7 paragraphs · 233 wordsSureshwar Thakur, J
The present petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus hence directing respondents No. 2 and 3 to give protection to the life and liberty of the petitioners, and also against any interference in the peaceful life of the petitioners being made at the behest of respondents No. 4 to 8.
The learned State Counsel, does not have any objection, to an order being made by this Court to the respondents concerned, to look into and decide through a speaking order, representation Annexure P-5.
Consequently, this Court directs the respondents concerned, to within three weeks hereafter, hence decide Annexure P-5, through a speaking order.
However, the afore order is subject to the condition that, upon the investigating officer, discovering credible evidence, with respect to the age of co-petitioner Tanupreet Kaur, and, in case from the birth certificate concerned, it is clear that she is below 18 years, thereupon, upon, a complaint being filed by the father of the afore, it is open for the investigating officer concerned, to draw an appropriate action, against the accused, but in accordance with law. Nonetheless, he may not arrest him without issuing seven days notice upon him.
Petition is disposed of.
A copy of this order be given dasti on payment of usual charges.