Aasif And Another vs State Of Haryana And Others
2022 Latest Caselaw 8804 P&H

138        IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                        AT CHANDIGARH

                                                CRM-W-1011-2022 in/and
                                                CRWP-7585-2022
                                                Date of decision:08.08.2022

Aasif and another                                                 ...Petitioners

                                   Versus

State of Haryana and others                                       ...Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VINOD S. BHARDWAJ
Present:       Mr. Mahir Sood, Advocate,
               for the petitioners.

               Mr. Kanwar Sanjiv Kumar, AAG, Haryana.

               Mr. Sarfaraj Anjum Mor, Advocate
               for respondent No.4.

                           *****

VINOD S. BHARDWAJ, J.(oral)

CRM-W-1011-2022

The instant application has been filed under Rule 3-A (1)

Chapter VI, Part-B, Vol. V of the Punjab and Haryana High Court Rules and

Orders for grant of leave to file the present petition.

Application is allowed as prayed for.

CRWP-7585-2022

The instant criminal writ petition has been filed under Article

226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of directions to the officials

respondents No.2 and 3 to initiate action on the representation dated

05.08.2022 (Annexures P-4) submitted to the official respondents No.2-

Superintendent of Police, Mewat, District Mewat, Haryana for protecting of

the life and liberty of the petitioners and with a further direction that the

private respondents should not interfere in the personal life of the

petitioners.

                                       1 of 3

 CRWP-7585-2022 (O&M)                                             -2-

2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners has

contended that the petitioner No.2 is a minor and she wishes to marry

petitioner No.1 of her own accord after attaining the age of majority. It has

been alleged that currently the petitioner No.2 is residing with the petitioner

No.1-Aasif and both the petitioners are running from pillar to post to save

their lives from the hands of respondent Nos.4 to 12. It is further submitted

that the petitioners have not been married to any other person earlier.

3. Reference can be made to certain orders/judgements of this

Court passed in CRWP-2238-2021 titled as Priyanka & Another Vs. State

of Haryana & Ors decided on 05.03.2021, wherein the minor who was in a

live-in-relationship was extended an indulgence; a similar order had been

passed in CRWP-6660-2020 titled as Jyoti Vs. State of Haryana & Ors

decided on 01.09.2020; CRWP-3990-2020 titled as Roopa Vs. State of

Haryana & Ors decided on 22.06.2020; CRWP-1525-2020 titled as

Sarabjeet Kaur & Another Vs. State of Punjab & Ors decided on

12.02.2020; CRWP-29048-2019 titled as Navpreet Kaur & Another Vs.

State of Punjab & Ors decided on 04.10.2019. A reference can also be

made to the judgement of this Court reported as 2019(4) RCR (Civil) 183

titled as Jashanpreet Kaur & Another Vs. State of Punjab & Ors.

4. The gist of the aforesaid orders/judgements was to the effect

that merely because the petitioners are not of marriageable age, it would not

deprive them of their fundamental right to seek protection of their lives and

liberties. The Court examined the issue in the context of the Hindu Marriage

Act, 1955 and held that merely because the petitioners are not of

the marriageable age and the marriage performed, if any, would be hit by

2 of 3

CRWP-7585-2022 (O&M) -3-

Section 5(iii) of the Hindu Marriage Act 1955, the same being only a civil

consequence qua the validity of the marriage, their rights under Article 21

of the Constitution of India cannot be denied as they stand on a much higher

pedestal. Life and liberty of the persons is sacrosanct being integral to their

being, it ought to be protected regardless of solemnization of invalid or void

marriage or even in the absence of any marriage amongst the parties. In all

the said matters, the respective SSPs/SPs were directed to verify the threat

perception and to take necessary steps to provide protection to the life and

liberty of the petitioners, if deemed fit and necessary.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone

through the documents appended by them with the petition. Learned counsel

for the petitioner further submits that the dispute in present case would be

covered by the judgment of this Court decided on 28.03.2022 in CRWP No.

2139-2022 (O&M) titled as P.....Minor through Vikram Versus State of

Haryana and others" and that he would be satisfied if the present petition is

disposed of in terms of the said judgment.

6. The said prayer is not objected by the learned counsel

appearing on behalf of State of Punjab.

7. The present petition is thus disposed of in terms of the

judgment passed in CRWP No. 2139-2022 (O&M) titled as "P.....Minor

through Vikram Versus State of Haryana and others" with the consent of

both the parties.

The petition is disposed of.

                                                    (VINOD S. BHARDWAJ )
08.08.2022                                                 JUDGE
hemlata

             Whether speaking / reasoned             Yes / No
             Whether reportable                      Yes / No


                                           3 of 3