KAMAL JINDAL Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB
LAWS(P&H)-2009-12-191
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Decided on December 10,2009

KAMAL JINDAL Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF PUNJAB Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.)The petitioners, it is stated, are major. The date of birth of petitioner No.1 as per his middle-standard examination certificate (Annexure P1) is 2.10.1988 and that of petitioner No.2 as per her matriculation examination certificate (Annexure P2) is 3.1.1985.
(2.)The petitioners had a liking for each other and therefore, decided to solemnize their marriage amongst themselves which was against the wishes of respondents No.6 and 7 who are the elder brother of petitioner No.1 and brother of petitioner No.2 respectively. Petitioner No.2 informed her brother (respondent No.7) that she wanted to marry petitioner No.1, but the brother (respondent No.7) of petitioner No.2 did not agree for the said marriage and warned petitioner No.2 not to pursue the matter. The petitioners on their own, therefore, solemnized their marriage amongst themselves on 25.11.2009 at Arya Samaj, Sector 22-A, Chandigarh. The marriage certificate (Annexure P3) issued by Arya Samaj, Sector-22A, Chandigarh and the photographs (Annexures P5 and P6) of marriage have been placed on record. After marriage, the petitioners are living as husband and wife at Chandigarh. When respondents No.6 and 7 came to know about the marriage of the petitioners, they instead of giving blessings to the petitioners came to the house of petitioner No.1 and started abusing the petitioners for solemnizing the marriage without their permission. The petitioners apprehend threat to their life. Therefore, the petitioners approached Senior Superintendent of Police, Sangrur (respondent No.2) and Senior Superintendent of Police, Mohali (respondent No.4) and Senior Superintendent of Police, Chandigarh (respondent No.5) for providing them adequate security. A representation (Annexure P4) has also been submitted by petitioner No.1 to the Senior Superintendent of Police, Mohali (respondent No.4) with copies to Senior Superintendent of Police, Chandigarh (UT) (respondent No.5), Senior Superintendent of Police, Sangrur (respondent No.2) and SHO, Police Station City Sunam (respondent No.3). Despite the said representation, the threat to the petitioners, it is submitted, persists. Therefore, they have approached this Court.
(3.)Both the petitioners are present in Court and are identified by their counsel. It is stated by petitioner No.2 that she has solemnized her marriage with petitioner No.1 of her own free will and desire and without any kind of pressure or undue influence. She is happy with her marriage.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.