Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2025 DAILYLAW 66504 (PNJ)

GAYATRI RAJPUROHIT AND ANOTHER v. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

CRWP/5776/2025 · 2025-06-02

Jagmohan Bansal

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

CRWP-5776-2025 1 113 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRWP-5776-2025 Date of Decision: 02.06.2025 GAYATRI RAJPUROHIT AND ANOTHER ......... Petitioners Versus STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS ..... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL Present : Mr. Bachanpreet Singh, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. K.D. Sachdeva, DAG, Punjab. **** JAGMOHAN BANSAL , J. (Oral) 1. The petitioners through instant petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India are seeking protection of their lives and liberty as guaranteed by Article 21 of the Constitution of India. 2. Notice of motion. 3. Mr. K.D. Sachdeva, DAG, Punjab, who on advance notice is present in Court, accepts notice on behalf of respondents No.1 to 3-State. Service of notice to the private respondents is dispensed with as no adverse order is passed against them. 4. As per petition and documents enclosed therewith i.e. Aadhar Card, petitioner-Gayatri Rajpurohit is more than 19 years old and petitioner No.2-Gurdit Singh is 27 years old. The petitioners are major and they have got married on 26.05.2025. In support of their contention, the petitioners have enclosed marriage certificate dated 26.05.2025 Asgar Ali 2025.06.02 16:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRWP-5776-2025 2 (Annexure P-3) issued by Gurudwara Dashmesh Pita Patshahi Dasvi (Regd.) Village, Singha Devi, The Kharar, District Mohali. 5. The petitioners have made a representation dated 26.05.2025 (Annexure P-5) to Senior Superintendent of Police, Fazilka, seeking protection of life and liberty. The petitioners have no apprehension of causing any injury on the part of the police or other Government authorities whereas the petitioners are claiming that there is apprehension that relatives of the petitioners may cause injury and put their lives to endanger. 6. While dealing with interference in conjugal life, the Apex Court in Lata Singh versus State of U.P. (2006) 5 SCC 475 has held:- “The caste system is a curse on the nation and the sooner it is destroyed the better. In fact, it is dividing the nation at a time when we have to be united to face the challenges before the nation unitedly. Hence, inter-caste marriages are in fact in the national interest as they will result in destroying the caste system. However, disturbing news are coming from several parts of the country that young men and women who undergo inter-caste marriage, are threatened with violence, or violence is actually committed on them. In our opinion, such acts of violence or threats or harassment are wholly illegal and those who commit them must be severely punished. This is a free and democratic country, and once a person becomes a major he or she can marry whosoever he/she likes. If the parents of the boy or girl do not approve of such inter-caste or inter- religious marriage the maximum they can do is that they can cut off social relations with the son or the daughter, but they cannot give threats or commit or Asgar Ali 2025.06.02 16:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRWP-5776-2025 3 instigate acts of violence and cannot harass the person who undergoes such inter-caste or interreligious marriage. 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 inter-caste 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”. 7. In terms of the Hon'ble Supreme Court observations, the official respondents are directed to examine the representations of the petitioners and ensure protection while appreciating the fact that there is threat to their life. This order shall not validate the marriage of the couple in any manner. 8. Disposed of. ( JAGMOHAN BANSAL ) JUDGE 02.06.2025 Ali Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No Asgar Ali 2025.06.02 16:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document