PAYAL Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mohd. Aslam Ansari, learned counsel for the petitioners and Shri S.S.Shrinet, learned Standing Counsel for the State -respondents.

(2.) BOTH the petitioners are present in the Court and they have been identified by their learned counsel. Both the petitioners appear to be major.

(3.) IN paragraph no.3 of the petition it is stated that the petitioner no.1 is aged about 18 years and her date of birth is 10.6.1996 as per High School certificate, a copy of which has been filed as Annexure -1. In pragraph -4 of the petition it is stated that the petitioner no.2 is also major and aged about 21 years and his date of birth is 10.8.1993, as per? photostat copy of High School marksheet filed as Annexure -2. It is stated that in paragraph -5 that the petitioner have married with each other on 25.8.2014 as per Hindu rites and rituals in Arya Samaj Temple, Chandigarh. A copy of marriage certificate issued by Arya Samaj dated 25.8.2014has been filed as Annexure -3.?