POONAM AND ANR v. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS
Court: High Court of Punjab and Haryana
Bench: MR. JUSTICE RAJ MOHAN SINGH
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Punjab and Haryana judgment dated 2020-02-14. POONAM AND ANR v. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRWP No. 1638 of 2020 Date of Decision: 14. 02. 2020 Poonam and another ...... Petitioners Vs State of Punjab and others ..... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJ MOHAN SINGH Present:Petitioners in-person along with Mr. Rajender Kumar, Advocate. **** RAJ MOHAN SINGH, J. (Oral) By way of filing the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners seek issuance of necessary directions for the protection of their lives and personal liberties from being violated by private respondents. Petitioners claimed themselves to be major and have contracted marriage on 11. 02. 2020 according to their voluntary act, but against the wishes of their family members. They have relied upon some documents/photographs in the context of validity of marriage. They have also moved a representation dated 11. 02. 2020 (Annexure P-5) to the Senior Superintendent of Police, Ludhiana, District Ludhiana.
Notice of motion to respondents No. 1 to 3. On asking of the Court, Mr. Ramandeep Sandhu, Sr. 2020. 02. 15 11:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRWP-1638-2020 2 DAG, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of State-respondents No. 1 to 3. At this stage without meaning anything upon the allegations and without commenting upon validity of marriage vis-a-vis majority of the petitioners, I am of the view that the petitioners be relegated to approach respondent No. 2 before whom they have statedly moved a representation. Respondent No. 2 shall ascertain the truth in the allegations of the petitioners and would pass appropriate order in accordance with law. Respondent No. 2 would be at liberty to assess the threat perception of the petitioners and would act in accordance with law. Respondent No. 2 would also be at liberty to join the petitioners or any other person acquainted with the facts of the case. Respondent No.
2 shall form an independent opinion, without being influenced by any statement of fact recorded hereinabove. It would be appreciated, if needful in deciding the representation is done within a period of one month from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. Petition stands disposed of. February 14, 2020 (RAJ MOHAN SINGH) geeta JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No 2020. 02. 15 11:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
Source: High Court of Punjab and Haryana. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.