DEVIKA Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By means of this writ petition under Articles 226/227 Constitution of India, petitioners have prayed for issuance of directions to official respondent Nos.1 to 3 to protect their life and liberty as they are facing threats at the hands of respondent Nos.4 to 7.

(2.) The facts in brief leading to the writ petition are that for the last six months, petitioner No.1 has been in contact with petitioner No.2, who fell in love and they decided to marry each other on attaining the age of majority. As per the pleadings, when the relationship of the petitioners came to the knowledge of private respondents, they turned against their alliance, therefore, the petitioners ran away from their respective houses on 08.01.2021 and are now living together. They apprehend that the private respondents would cause harm to them, so they submitted a representation dated 08.01.2021 (Annexure P-2) to Senior Superintendent of Police, District Ferozepur, however, till date no action has been taken by the said officer. Hence this writ petition.

(3.) Learned counsel contends that though the petitioner No.1 is minor and she has decided to marry the petitioner No.2, but as the parents of the petitioner No.1 are against this alliance, therefore, they are apprehending threat to their life. He has further contended that the parents of the minor girl were compelling her for marriage with a person of their choice, so they both ran away on 08.01.2021 and started residing together. He submits that the grievance of the petitioners conveyed through the representation to respondent No.2 has not been addressed so far, therefore, the necessary directions be issued by providing protection to the petitioners. In support of his argument, learned counsel has placed reliance upon two decisions rendered by this Court in LPA No.385-2016 (Elaichi and another Vs. State of Punjab and others). CWP No.1 7069-2019 (Kawalieet Kaur and another Vs. State of Punjab and others) and order dated 11.01.2021 passed in CRWP-228-2021 (Simran Rani and another Vs. State of Harvana and others).