Sunil Dhir And Another vs State Of Punjab And Others on 6 October, 2009

Punjab-Haryana High Court
Sunil Dhir And Another vs State Of Punjab And Others on 6 October, 2009

                             Crl.Misc.No.M-27794 of 2009 (O&M)

                              Date of decision : 6.10.2009

Sunil Dhir and another


State of Punjab and others



Present : Mr.Sandeep Arora, Advocate
          for the petitioners.


Crl.Misc.No.50345 of 2009 is allowed.

This is a petition under Section 482 of the Code

of Criminal Procedure praying for directions to respondent Nos.2 and

3 to protect their life and liberty which is alleged to be in danger at

the hands of respondent Nos. 4 and 5 on account of their having got

married against their parental consent.

Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that both the

petitioners are major.

Even though this court is disinclined to entertain and to go

into such allegations, but at the same time it cannot be oblivious to

the fact that because of social friction and sectarian differences such

incidents are not entirely unheard of and prima facie the case also
Crl.Misc.No.M-27794 of 2009 (O&M) -2-

appears to be covered by the observations of Supreme Court in Fiaz

Ahmed Ahanger & Ors. v. State of J & K 2009(3) R.A.J.692, which

are as under :-

“In such cases of intercaste or inter-religion marriage

the Court has only to be satisfied about two things :

(1) that the girl is above 18 years of age, in which

case, the law regards her as a major vide Section 3

of the Indian Majority Act, 1875. A major is

deemed by the law to know what is in his or her


(2) The wish of the girl.

In the circumstances, we direct that nobody will

harass, threaten or commit any acts of violence or other

unlawful act on the petitioner, Chanchali Devi/Mehvesh

Anjum and the petitioner’s family members and they shall

not be arrested till further orders in connection with the

case in question. If they feel insecure, they can apply to

the police and, in such event, the police shall grant

protection to them.”

In view of this, the petition is disposed of with a direction

to respondent No.2 to look into the allegations as contained in the

petition personally and take necessary steps in accordance with law if

the situation so warrants.

This order shall not be construed to be conferring the

legitimacy or authenticity to the factum of marriage having been
Crl.Misc.No.M-27794 of 2009 (O&M) -3-

performed as the Court is clearly deprived of any means to determine

the aforesaid facts.

Copy of the petition along with a copy of this order be sent

to respondent No.2.

6.10.2009                               (MAHESH GROVER)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes:

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *