CRM-M 28041 of 2009 -1-
IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
CRM No.50761 of 2009 and
CRM-M 28041 of 2009
Date of Decision: 7.10.2009
Muni @ Shivani and another
..Petitioners.
Vs.
State of Haryana and others
..Respondents.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN
Present : Mr.Virander Soni, Advocate for the petitioners.
RAKESH KUMAR JAIN, J. (Oral)
CRM No.50761 of 2009
Allowed as prayed for.
Main Case
As per the averments made in the petition, petitioner No.1 is 18
years of age as per her birth certificate (Annexure P-1) and petitioner No.2
is 25 years of age as per matriculation certificate (Annexure P-2). They have
stated that they have performed marriage as per Sikh rites and ceremonies
on 5.10.2009. Marriage certificate is attached as Annexure P-3 and
photographs of their marriage are appended as Annexure P-4.
Though both the petitioners are major yet they are
apprehending danger to their lives at the hands of respondents No.4 to 7 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
475 in which it is held that “Once a person becomes a major, he or she can
CRM-M 28041 of 2009 -2-
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, if any made 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)
7.10.2009 Judge
Meenu