Narinder Kumar & Anr vs State Of H.P. & Ors
2021 Latest Caselaw 2170 HP

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA

                                                   CWP No. 1732/2021
                                                   Decided on : 17.3.2021




                                                                                      .

    Narinder Kumar & anr.                                                        .....Petitioners

                                          Versus





    State of H.P. & ors.                                                         ....Respondents

    Coram:

    The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge.




    The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Chander Bhusan Barowalia, Judge.
    Whether approved for reporting?1No

    For the Petitioners:    Mr. Naresh Kaul, Advocate.
    For the Respondents:    Mr. Ashok Sharma, A.G. with Mr. Vinod

                            Thakur, Mr. Vikas Rathore,Mr.Shiv Pal
                            Manhans, Addl.A.Gs.Mr. J. S. Guleria
                            and Mr. Bhupinder Thakur, Dy.A.Gs.
    ________________________________________________________________



               Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge (oral)

The instant petition has been filed by the petitioners,

who claim themselves to be the husband and wife, for directing

the respondents to protect their life and liberty.

2. The petitioner No.1, claims to be a major and aged

about 30 years, whose date of birth is 9.1.1991, whereas the

petitioner No.2 is stated to be aged about 22 years and her date

of birth is 16.6.1998. Certain documents in support of their age

have also been annexed.

____________________

Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes.

3. As per averments made in the writ petition, petitioner

.

No.1 (Narinder Kumar) belongs to scheduled caste family,

whereas petitioner No.2 (Seema Devi) belongs to Rajput family

and they have solemnized marriage out of free will and consent

with each other on 12.3.2021 at Brij Raj Swami Temple, Nurpur,

District Kangra as is evident from affidavits, Annexure P­1 and P­

2 respectively. After solemnization of marriage, they are living as

husband and wife.

4. It is alleged that on 15.3.2021, about 25 people, who

were relatives and villagers from parental house of petitioner No.2

visited native place of petitioner No.1, opposed the marriage of

petitioners being inter case marriage and threatened them with

dire consequences. The petitioners approached the police

authorities, but of no avail. According to them, relatives and

villagers from the parental house of petitioner No.1 can eliminate

them for the honour of her family and in case this Court does not

grant them protection, their lives may be endangered. It is in this

background that the present petition has been filed.

5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and

have gone through the records of the case carefully.

6. Love marriages and thereafter tussles between the

.

families of the couple is an age old issue and one similar issue

came up before a Division Bench of this Court in Priyanka and

another vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and others, Cr. W.P.

No. 8 of 2014, decided on 23.4.2014 and this Court passed the

following directions:

"3. We are not oblivious to the fact that the cases of

such nature relating to 'run away couples' are repeatedly

coming before this Court and, therefore, it is not only high time but imperative that certain guidelines and directions are issued to deal with such cases. Accordingly, we

proceed to issue following guidelines and directions:­

(i) Whenever any representation is received by the S.P. of

concerned District regarding the marriage of a young couple under a threat or an apprehension of infringement of the right

of life and liberty at the instance of the family members of one of the spouses or even at the instance of the police, the S.P.

concerned will consider the representation and will himself/herself look into the matter and issue necessary directions to maintain a record of the said intimation under Chapter 21 of the Punjab Police Rules.

(ii) On receipt of abovesaid intimation of marriage by any police officer, necessary directions will be issued to the concerned Police Station to take necessary steps in accordance with law to enquire into the matter by contacting the parents of both boy and the girl. The matter regarding age, voluntary consent of the girl and grievance of her family will be determined.

(iii) In the eventuality of any complaint of kidnapping or

.

abduction having been received from any of the family members

of the girl, the boy (husband) will not be arrested unless and until the prejudicial statement is given by the girl(wife). Arrest

should generally be deferred or avoided on the immediate receipt of a complaint by the parents or family members of the girl taking into consideration the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Joginder Kumar Versus State of U.P. and

others (1994) 4 SCC 260.

(iv) If the girl is major (above 18 years), she cannot forcibly

be taken away by police to be handed over to her parents

against her consent. Criminal force against the boy cannot be used.

(v) In case of threat to the young couple of criminal force and

assault at the hands of the private persons, the same will be dealt with in accordance with law.

(vi) In case of any threat to the breach of peace at the hands

of the family members of either of the couple it will always be

open to the State authorities to take up the security proceedings in accordance with law.

(vii) It will not be open to the "run away couple" to take law

in their hands pursuant to the indulgence shown by the police on the basis of their representation sent to the SP of the concerned District.

(viii) If despite the intimation having been sent to the SP there is an apprehension or threat of violation of right of personal life and liberty or free movement, the remedy of approaching the High Court should be the last resort.

(ix) In case there is an authority constituted for issuance of marriage certificate as per the law laid down by the Supreme

Court in Seema (Smt) Versus Ashwani Kumar (2006) 2 SCC

.

578, (2008) 1 SCC 180, (2008) 7 SCC 509 case in the

concerned districts, the couple of so called 'run away marriage' should get the marriage registered in compliance with the

directions of the Supreme Court and a copy of the same should also be forwarded to the police alongwith the representations or any time subsequent thereto.

(x) In case, it is found that the girl, who has been enticed

away, is a minor and is either not willing to go with her parents or her parents have refused to accept and take her home, then she will be taken to the 'Nari Niketan' or other Shelter Homes

where her protection and safety shall be of paramount

consideration and ensured at all costs. In no case would the minor girl be permitted to accompany her alleged husband since the marriage is void, abinitio being in contravention of Section

12 of the Hindu Marriage Act;

(xi) Nothing said hereinabove will prevent the immediate

arrest of a person who fraudulently entices a girl with false promises and exploits her sexually as per the statement of the

girl."

7. A perusal of the documents annexed with the

petition, prima facie goes to show that both the petitioners are

major. A major girl is free to marry anyone she likes or live with

anyone, she likes and in case she is now married and residing

with petitioner No.1, then no offence has been committed by her.

The petitioners, have a right to live their lives the way it suits

them and no person or authority much less the parents of the

parties can interfere with their lives, what to talk of trying carry

.

out threat, intimidation or even terrorize the petitioners.

8. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Lata Singh vs. State

of U.P. and another AIR 2006 SC 2522 while dealing with a

case of harassment by the parents of the boy and girl, who had

entered into an inter­caste marriage, had issued directions to

the administration/ police authorities throughout the country in

the following terms:

"17......"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 inter­caste or inter­religious marriage with a woman or man who is a major, the couple are not harassed by any one nor subjected to threats or acts of

violence, and any one 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."

9. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed by

directing respondents No. 3 and 4 to ensure that the petitioners

are not harassed by anyone nor subjected to threats or act of

violence, and anyone who gives such threats or harasses or

commits acts of violence either himself or at his instigation will

be taken to task by instituting criminal proceedings against him

and further stern action shall be taken against such person as

.

provided by law. In the meanwhile, the petitioners in terms of the

directions passed in Priyanka's case (supra), shall approach the

Superintendent of Police concerned, who shall proceed with the

matter in accordance with the guidelines and directions issued

by this Court (supra).

The petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

                                             (Tarlok Singh Chauhan)
                                                      Judge



                                         (Chander Bhusan Barowalia)
    17.3.2021                                      Judge




     (pankaj)