Punjab-Haryana High Court
Kumari Shailza And Another vs Union Territory Chandigarh And Others on 6 January, 2021
109
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRWP No.49 of 2021
Date of Decision : 06.01.2021
Kumari Shailza and another
..... Petitioners
Versus
Union Territory Chandigarh and others
..... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDIP AHLUWALIA
Present: Mr. Kulbir S. Saini, Advocate,
for the Petitioners.
SUDIP AHLUWALIA J. (ORAL)
Both the Petitioners are present in person through Video Conferencing and identified by their Counsel. They seek protection of their life and liberty by contending that both of them having attained the age of majority, have married each other against the wishes of their respective family members Respondent Nos.4 and 5, and so seek appropriate protection from the authorities. They submitted a representation (Annexure P-5) in this regard to the Senior Superintendent of Police, U.T., Chandigarh on 02.01.2021, but are still apprehensive about their security in view of the apparent inaction and alleged clout of their family members-respondents.
2. Both of them do appear to have crossed the age of majority as seen from the copies of documents filed and have married each other, in support of which, Photographs and Marriage Certificate issued by "Sri Nirankari Darbar (Rawalpindi) Sector 21-B, Chandigarh" (Annexures P-3 and P-4) have been placed on record.
1 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 07-01-2021 02:08:28 ::: CRWP No.49 of 2021 -2-
3. For the aforesaid reasons, this appears to be a fit case for this Court to invoke the inherent powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. and in view of the mandate contained in Article 21 of the Constitution of India to protect the citizen's right to life and liberty.
4. Thus the Senior Superintendent of Police, U.T., Chandigarh is directed to consider the representation dated 02.01.2021 (Annexure P-5) and take appropriate steps to ensure that no harm is caused to the life and liberty of the petitioners.
5. It is nevertheless clarified that this order is issued only on the premise that the petitioners have crossed the age of majority as seen from the documents placed on record being their Aadhar Cards. The petitioners have not produced on record a copy of their marriage certificate. This would not ipso facto amount to granting any seal of approval on the legality of their marriage which essentially would come in the domain of the concerned Matrimonial Courts. Further, they would not be entitled for any protection against their arrest or continuance of any criminal proceedings, if otherwise, found to be involved in commission of any cognizable offence(s).
6. The petition is disposed off with the above direction.
January 06, 2021 (SUDIP AHLUWALIA)
Dpr JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
2 of 2
::: Downloaded on - 07-01-2021 02:08:28 :::