CRM-M 32026 of 2009 -1-
IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
CRM Nos.57946 of 2009 and
CRM-M 32026 of 2009
Date of Decision: 13.11.2009
Gagandeep Singh and another
..Petitioners.
Vs.
State of Punjab and others
..Respondents.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN
Present : Mr.Sanjiv Peter, Advocate for the petitioners.
RAKESH KUMAR JAIN, J. (Oral)
As per the averments made in the petition, the date of birth of
petitioner No.1 is 31.10.1987 as per his passport (Annexure P-1) and date
of birth of petitioner No.2 is 15.8.1987 as per her passport (Annexure P-2).
Both the petitioners are major and have got married on 19.10.2009 as per
Hindu Rites. Photographs of their marriage are attached as Annexure P-3
and marriage certificate is Annexure P-4.
Before coming to this Court, the petitioners had made a
representation (Annuxure P-5) to Senior Superintendent of Police,
Kapurthala for providing them security.
Though both the petitioners are major yet they are
apprehending danger to their lives and liberty at the hands of respondents
No.4 to 8 as they have married against their wishes.
Counsel for the petitioners relies upon a decision of the
Supreme Court in Lata Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another (2006) 5 SCC
CRM-M 32026 of 2009 -2-
475 in which it is held that “Once a person becomes a major, he or she can
marry whosoever he/she likes. If the parents of the boy or girl do not
approve of such inter-caste or inter-religious marriage, the maximum they
can do is that they can cut-off social relations with the son or the daughter,
but they cannot give threats or commit or instigate acts of violence and
cannot harass the person who undergoes such inter-caste or inter-religious
marriage. We, therefore, direct that the administration/police authorities
throughout the country will see to it that if any boy or girl who is a major
undergoes inter-caste or inter-religious marriage with a woman or man who
is a major, the couple is not harassed by anyone nor subjected to threats or
acts of violence, and anyone who gives such threats or harasses or commits
acts of violence either himself or at his instigation, is taken to task by
instituting criminal proceedings by the police against such persons and
further stern action is taken against such persons as provided by law.”
After hearing the counsel for the petitioners and keeping in
view the facts and circumstances of the case particularly the fact that both
the petitioners are major, respondent No.2 is directed to look into the
representation (Annexure P-5) and if the facts stated in the application are
found to be correct and any danger to the lives and liberty of the petitioners
is found, he shall provide necessary protection to them.
The petition stands disposed of.
(Rakesh Kumar Jain)
13.11.2009 Judge
Meenu