Judgment:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.
Kang Gursharan Singh 2014.06.03 11:43 Criminal Miscellaneous No.M- 19750 of 2014 DATE OF DECISION : June 02, 2014 RAJIYA AND ANOTHER .......PETITIONER(S) VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA & ORS...RESPONDENT(S) CORAM : HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE S.S.SARON Present: Ms.Vandana Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioneRs.S.S.SARON, J.
(Oral) The petitioners belong to Muslim religion and they have contracted marriage according to Muslim rites and ceremonies.
Both the petitioners had a long standing relationship with each other.
They have performed the marriage of their own.
Earlier, parents (respondents No.4 and 5) of petitioner No.1 had forcibly married her along with her elder sister with Arif son of Rahees, resident of Village Lahabas without consent of petitioner No.1.
The fiRs.marriage was void when petitioner No.1 informed her earlier husband-Arif about her relationship and that she wanted to marry petitioner No.2.
Thereafter, Arif, on 25.11.2011, gave a divorce to petitioner No.1.
The petitioner No.1, thereafter, lived at her parental house.
The family of petitioner No.1 was not accepting the relationship of the petitioneRs.Petitioner No.1 informed her parents (respondents Criminal Miscellaneous No.M- 19750 of 2014 2 No.4 and 5) about her relationship with petitioner No.2 but they threatened her with dire consequences.
The petitioneRs.then, ran away from their respective homes on 26.5.2014.
They went to Nur Masjid, Delhi where the Nikah was performed by them on 26.5.2014.
Copy of the Nikahnama issued by Qazi Mohd.
Hussain, Imam, Nur Masjid, Delhi-17 has been placed on record as Annexure P-3.
Taking of photographs in the Nikah ceremony, it is submitted, is prohibited.
Both the petitioneRs.it is stated, are major.
However, the parents (respondents No.4 and 5) of petitioner No.1 are threatening to kill the petitioneRs.Respondents No.6 to 9, it is stated by the learned counsel for the petitioneRs.are cousins and relatives of petitioner No.1, and they are also against the marriage.
The petitioners apprehend threat from them.
The petitioners submitted representation dated 31.5.2014 (Annexure P-4) to the Superintendent of Police, Mewat for providing them police protection.
However, despite the said representation, the threat to them persists.
Both the petitioners are present in Court and are identified by their counsel.
It is stated by the petitioners that they have solemnized their marriage with each other of their own free will and desire and without any kind of pressure or undue influence.
It is also stated by the petitioners that they were not earlier married.
Besides, they are happy with their marriage.
Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the Criminal Miscellaneous No.M- 19750 of 2014 3 case, the criminal miscellaneous petition is disposed of with a direction to respondents No.2 and 3 that in case the petitioners approach any of them setting out their grievances as have been made in the present petition, the same would be looked into and considered by them independently and in accordance with law.
Nothing stated herein shall be construed in any other litigation to be an expression of opinion on the validity of the marriage between the petitioners and if such a question arises, the same would be considered on the facts and circumstances, in accordance with law.
This petition has been disposed of only for giving protection to the petitioners so that they are not unnecessarily harassed.
June 2, 2014 ( S.S.SARON ) Kang JUDGE