Punjab and Haryana High Court
CRM-M/44571/2014 of HARPREET KAUR AND ANOTHER Vs STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS on 31 December 2014
COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-44571-2014 Date of Decision: December 31, 2014 Harpreet Kaur and Another .....Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and others .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURMIT RAM Present: Mr. Dheeraj Mahajan, Advocate for the petitioners. *****
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Harpreet Kaur and Another
CRM-M-44571-2014Date of Decision: December 31, 2014
Versus
_...Petitioners
State of Punjab and others
CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURMIT RAM
.... Respondents
Present:Mr. Dheeraj Mahajan, Advocate for the petitioners.
KK KK
GURMIT RAM, J. (Oral)
Prayer in the present petition filed under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. is forissuance of a direction to the official respondents to protect the life and liberty of thepetitioners and not to harass them at the instance of respondent Nos.4 to 7.
The petitioners have got married against the wishes of their parents. Theyare stated to be major. In support of her proof of age petitioner No.1 has placed onrecord a copy of middle standard examination certificate (Annexure P-2) wherein herdate of birth is mentioned as 13.12.1992, whereas petitioner No.2 has also placed onrecord a copy of matriculation examination certificate (Annexure P-1) depicting hisdate of birth as 08.10.1992. They have also moved a representation before the SHO,Police Station Ghuman, Tehsil Batala, Distt. Gurdaspur (Annexure P-5) for protectionof lives and liberty.
Without adverting to the merits of the controversy, the present petition isdisposed of with a direction to respondent No.2, the Senior Superintendent of Police,Batala, to take appropriate action on the said representation.
This order has nothing to do with regard to validity or invalidity of the marriage of the petitioners. |
{| GURMIT RAM JUDGE