Mehinder Singh Sullar, J.@mdashThe crux of the facts and material which needs necessary mention for a limited purpose of deciding the core
controversy, involved in the instant petition and emanating from the record is that Nisha D/o Ratti Ram (detenue) has solemnized her love marriage
with the petitioner-Yash Pal S/o Raghbir on 10.08.2012 against the wishes of her parents, according to Hindu Rights and ceremonies. On
12.08.2012, she was produced before the Executive Magistrate, Ferozepur Jhirka, where she made her statement (Ex. P-2). Instead of directing
the release of the detenue, the Executive Magistrate ordered to send her to Nari Niketan, vide impugned order dated 17.08.2012 (Annexure P-3).
2. Petitioner-Yash Pal husband of the detenue did not feel satisfied and preferred the instant petition to quash the impugned order dated
17.08.2012 (Annexure P-3), invoking the provisions of Section 482 Cr. PC.
3. In pursuance of the order dated 30.08.2012 of this Court, respondent No. 5 has produced her in the court. Detenue Nisha made the following
statement:
I am major. I have voluntarily performed my marriage with petitioner Yash Pal son of Raghbir, without any kind of pressure or coercion. I am
happily residing with my husband in may matrimonial home. I want to go with my husband (petitioner).
4. Not only that birth certificate (Annexure P-1) would go to show that the date of birth of the detenue Nisha is 20.09.1992. According to her
statement Annexure P-2 made before the Executive Magistrate and statement made in this Court, she is major; she voluntarily performed her
marriage with the petitioner; she intendes to go with her husband Yash Pal-petitioner. She had specifically stated in her statement (Annexure P-2)
that she did not want to go with her parents.
5. Meaning thereby, it stands proved on the record that petitioner and the detenue were major at the time of marriage. She voluntarily performed
her love marriage with the petitioner against the wishes of her parents. She wants to live with the petitioner in her matrimonial home. Therefore, to
my mind, the Executive Magistrate had slipped into a deep legal error to detain her (detenue) in the Nari Niketan, vide impugned order dated
17.08.2012 (Annexure P-3). As the liberty of the detenue is involved, therefore, the impugned order cannot legally be sustained in the obtaining
circumstances of the case.
6. In the light of the aforesaid reasons, the present petition is accepted. The impugned order dated 17.08.2012 (Annexure P-3) is set aside. The
detenue is permitted to accompany her husband Yash Pal- petitioner in the manner, she likes. Ordered accordingly.
